Grown man and new White House press secretary Sean Spicer chews an insane amount of gum every day and swallows it whole. His preferred flavor is cinnamon Orbit (made by the Wrigley Company).

"Two and a half packs by noon," Spicer told The Washington Post in an old article. "I talked to my doctor about it, he said it's no problem." This revelation actually came in August 2016 in the midst of the Trump presidential campaign, back when Spicer was still the Republican party's chief strategist and spokesperson, but it gained new currency this week on Twitter as Spicer began his duties as Press Secretary.

We at Motherboard wanted a second opinion about Spicer's gum consumption habit, so we talked to a doctor about it.

Dr. Daniel Motola, a Manhattan-based gastroenterologist, agrees it's probably not a big deal, as long as Spicer doesn't have any side effects from his habit.

Several components in gum can be digested. Those that can't be are either fermented in the colon, or come out in the stool. "It's probably not completely digestible," Motola said in a phone call with Motherboard. "The theoretical risk in eating large amounts of gum is that it could create an intestinal blockage."

Read more on Motherboard

Thanks to a presidential administration that defends "alternative facts" as something other than just a synonym for lies, fake news and the intentional spread of misinformation is on the rise. Recently, a few researchers from Cambridge, Yale, and George Mason University decided to study the way people succumb to this epidemic and found a method to help stop its spread that's similar to how doctors use vaccines.

In the study, the researchers presented 2,000 American participants with two different claims about global warming—one was a factual pie chart showing that 97 percent of scientists agree about man-made climate change, and the other was a bogus petition that says "human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity" and is signed with thousands of fake signatures from names like Charles Darwin and the Spice Girls.

Scientists found that when people were presented with just the factual pie chart, they were 20 percent more likely to agree that there was a scientific consensus about climate change. When participants were presented with just the misinformation, they were 9 percent more likely to believe global warming has no scientific validity. When participants were presented with both pieces of information back-to-back, most people's opinions didn't change from when they began the experiment.

"A lot of people's attitudes toward climate change aren't very firm," lead study author Sander van der Linden said following the experiment. "They are aware there is a debate going on, but aren't necessarily sure what to believe. Conflicting messages can leave them feeling back at square one."

However, when scientists introduced a general warning about misinformation to people, in the same way a vaccine introduces a virus to the body, people were generally better at recognizing the fake news.

Researchers did that by offering extra data alongside the factual information, explaining that politically charged groups often try to convince the public that there's disagreement among scientists and often employ distortion tactics—like fake signatures—to manipulate people. When participants then saw the bogus petition after the pie chart, they were more likely to regard it as fake and were then 6.5 percent more likely to agree there was a scientific consensus on climate change.

"Misinformation can be sticky, spreading and replicating like a virus," van der Linden said. "The idea is to provide a cognitive repertoire that helps build up resistance to misinformation, so the next time people come across it they are less susceptible."

The good news is the inoculation worked equally well regardless of the person's political affiliation (even though Republicans were statistically more likely to be swayed by false information regarding climate change than Democrats). Guess that means now journalists have to warn everyone about "alternative facts" and fake news tactics when presenting their own fact-based reporting.

Donald Trump has been president of the United States for just a few days but is already embroiled in fights on several fronts. He's been feuding with the media over the size of his inauguration crowds, contending with an historic show of mass opposition from the Women's March on Washington, faces a defamation lawsuit from a woman who says Trump sexually assaulted her, and has a pressing need to fill empty slots in his government, just to name a few.

But the most significant moment for the new administration so far may have come Monday morning, when a coterie of prominent ethics lawyers teamed up with a watchdog group to sue Trump for allegedly violating the Constitution by accepting gifts from foreign governments. Filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and a bipartisan group of constitutional scholars, including a former ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, the suit claims the money going to Trump's business empire around the world represents a massive—and illegal—conflict of interest.

Trump's opponents have been highlighting for months how his real estate and licensing businesses could create potential conflicts for his administration. But this is the first legal challenge to Trump on the issue, and even if it doesn't succeed in forcing the president to divest from his companies, it might force some details about his finances to see the light of day.

Jeffrey Jacobovitz, a prominent Washington defense lawyer who represented members of the scandal-plagued Clinton administration in the 1990s, thinks the case has some kind of shot—assuming it can clear an initial procedural hurdle. Here's what he had to say about the first major lawsuit against the 45th president since his inauguration, and what it means.

VICE: You've seen your share of lawsuits alleging misconduct by government employees in Washington. How does this one stack up?
Jeffrey Jacobovitz: I think it's a well-drafted complaint. And I think one of the goals of the complaint, among other things, is if a judge lets it go forward—and the judge who the case was assigned to is an Obama appointee in New York—during discovery, it's possible Trump will be ordered to produce his tax returns.

Now, those returns may be ordered to be produced pursuant to a protective order in the case, and remain confidential. But somebody may see it.

What, exactly, does the complaint allege? It's very specific, right?
It's narrowly drawn about the Foreign Emoluments Clause. What that clause says is a foreign nation or agent cannot give gifts to the president—essentially, the president cannot benefit from his dealings with foreign countries. So if dignitaries from Dubai or Kuwait stay in his hotel in DC, trying to win favor from the president, and the president—you don't even necessarily need to have a quid pro quo—but if the president is aware of that, that's trying to gain favor through a foreign gift.

If Trump has golf courses in Scotland or he's trying to build buildings in China and any of these countries afford him the opportunity, that could be construed as a gift—which would violate the Constitution, arguably.

Have we seen other cases like this under recent administrations?
This is an unusual situation. During the Clinton administration, I believe there was an investigation into gifts received and whether they were properly recorded. Now, a potential weakness of the lawsuit and one thing the judge will have to figure out is whether CREW has standing to bring the case, whether they've been injured, and what their general grievance is. You have to show some kind of personalized injury, and the issue is whether they've been able to show it.

Does it matter who brings the lawsuit—a liberal advocacy group, constitutional law professors, an ethics lawyer from the Bush administration? Is that likely to affect whether a judge will allow a case to go ahead?
You never can tell what a judge is going to do, whether a judge will issue an injunction, whether a judge will allow discovery and the case will proceed to trial, how long it would take, if there's an appeal and so forth. But there's risk to Trump with this lawsuit being filed.

Is the complaint too aggressive to be viable?
I think it's narrowly targeted, but you have an unusual situation here of the president being a businessman. How many presidents in the recent past were businesspeople and not politicians? This is a completely different scenario, in a situation where the president hasn't revealed his tax returns so you don't know who he's gotten money from, who he owes money to. You don't know where his interests are, which countries he's invested in. There's a lot of question marks and I think the complaint was drafted, in a sense, in a vacuum because they're trying to determine where he has those interests.

If a judge decides this group of scholars and CREW don't have standing, who could possibly make a valid complaint citing the Emolument Clause?
It could be some ethics committee on Capitol Hill. It could be the Department of Justice ethics office. But if these offices are controlled by Republicans and not independent, it's unlikely that these lawsuits would be brought. That might be an argument I would make to a judge, which is that I'm the best person or plaintiff to bring this lawsuit, because if don't bring it, no one else will.

If a federal judge does order Trump to release his tax returns, and the White House refused, how would that play out?
He could be held in contempt.

But practically speaking, does that matter for a president—or this president?
If there's a refusal and he's held in contempt, and he refuses to abide by the Constitution, then you get into the question of whether it rises to the level of somebody on the Hill moving for impeachment. Because if you're not following the law, you're not abiding by the law, others will rise up and say, "Why do I have to?"

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Follow Matt Taylor on Twitter.

This past weekend, hundreds of thousands of people descended upon Washington, DC for the inauguration of Donald Trump. Some were there to celebrate, while others were there to protest. Jamali Maddix, the British comedian who hosts VICELAND's HATE THY NEIGHBOR, headed to the nation's capital with a camera crew to talk to both sides of the divide.

"I think I'm going to see people who are going to be very happy with the result, and there will be people who are not happy with the result," he said late last week, before heading out on the trip. "Whether you think it's good or bad—it's going to be something that defines this portion of the generation. It's definitely a very defining moment, if you think it's good or bad. It's going to be historical."

You can watch the resulting video of Maddix's experience above—but wait! There's more. Tonight, HATE THY NEIGHBOR premieres at 10 PM EST, chronicling Maddix's efforts here and abroad to try and find out what it is in human nature that makes people hate each other so much. Read on for our conversation about racism, what to expect from the show, and whether people can actually change over time.

VICE: Tell me what Hate Thy Neighbor is about.
Jamali Maddix: It's about a comedian going around the world trying to find out why people hate. I'm a dude who's confused, going to places, getting one question answered, and having three more questions thrown at him. I'm a normal guy trying to figure out why other humans act like this.

What about the show's subject matter speaks to you?
Growing up in London, I saw certain people's hate and views. I've always been fascinated by people disliking a group of people they haven't met—how people can not like someone they don't know? That's what drew me toward it.

In America, the party line is sometimes that race is something you don't talk about. Is that as something that you're trying to combat with this show?
I'm not trying to be an arbiter of morality for people. I can only go from what I believe, this is something I want to understand and know more about. Should people talk about race? Yeah, but I'm not trying to force people to do anything. Everyone has their own choice. I do think the world would be a better place if people were more open about things, though.

Sometimes, racism is framed as a misunderstanding rather than an act of hate. I'm curious about your thoughts on the schism between those two beliefs. Is there such a thing as racism by misunderstanding?
Misunderstanding can be one of the causes of why people are racist, but there's loads of other factors, too—fear, a sense of community, upbringing, social circumstance. To say it's a misunderstanding—you're looking at the tip of the iceberg.

Sometimes, people who previously had hateful viewpoints change over time and become more accepting of others. Does that make them all better, or is it right to be skeptical?
That's a difficult one. If someone thought a certain way and now they don't—if they want to change their life—there has to be some type of redemption and forgiveness in this world. No one is fucking perfect. That's not justifying their views, of course fucking not, their views are fucked up—but at the same time, to make someone who said they had certain views an outcast is a strange thing to me. It's hard, but if someone was a member of a racist organization and then they generally changed their views, there is growth, and there could be grounds for redemption.

Tell me about an experience you had filming this season that was memorable.
In Ukraine, I went to a music festival without knowing that it was a white power music festival with people armed with knives and stuff—they were very upset I was there. Going to the refugee jungle in Calais really changed me as a human—to say it didn't effect me would be lying. It made me think a lot. There's so many experiences I've had doing this show.

What have you learned?
You can't think human beings could ever end up like this, whether they're fascists or they're willing to let people sleep in fucked-up conditions in Calais. What i've learned is that humanity doesn't stop, shockingly. I've met some people who were great human beings and I've met great people, nice people, fun people, and scary people. A wide selection.

Photo above: the day's winner, Slaviša Ivanović, holding an icon.

This article originally appeared on VICE Serbia

In the Eastern Orthodox Christian Church, Epiphany is a very important holiday. It celebrates Jesus Christ's baptism in the river Jordan, which is seen as his manifestation as the Son of God. Serbian rivers and lakes during the winter are probably a lot colder than the river Jordan, but that doesn't stop hundreds of Serbian men and women celebrating Epiphany by diving in every year, on the 19th of January.

Every ceremony starts off with a priest blessing the river or lake the dive will take place in, and throwing in a wooden cross. A pack of swimmers dives into the freezing water, and whoever finds the cross first brings it back to shore. The winner and his family receive a special blessing from the priest.

Photographer Aleksa Vitorović attended the celebration of Epiphany in the Zemun municipality of Serbia's capital Belgrade. Zemun sits on the banks of the Danube, Europe's second-longest river, which is currently partly frozen. Slaviša Ivanović, a professional stuntman, was the first to snatch away the wooden cross that day.

More European traditions on VICE:

Photos of Horses Jumping Through Fire for a Better 2017

The French Custom of Throwing Wooden Spoons at People

The Strange Swiss Custom of Dressing Up as a Bush and Throwing Women in Wells

The whole point of having a nuclear deterrent is that you're never supposed to have to use it. If you did, it would hardly matter, since that would mean that the world was about to be destroyed anyway.

So in a sense, it's moot that our Trident systems may not be working. And icymi: our nukes don't work and the PM is accused by MPs of covering it up. According to the Sunday Times, a Trident missile veered off course during a test in June last year, weeks before Parliament voted to spend £40 billion renewing it. On Sunday, Theresa May was on the Andrew Marr Show, repeatedly refusing to answer whether she knew about it at the time and if she failed to tell Parliament as they debated it.

It's a cringeworthy watch. Marr asks May "Did you know?" four times. "I have absolute faith in our Trident Missiles… what we were talking about was whether or not we should renew our Trident," she said – patronisingly repeating the basic context in which every viewer understands the question is being asked, rather than answering it.

On one level it doesn't matter. The whole point of Trident is to merely look tough. If no one had ever found out about the malfunction, which occurred in June of last year, it would have made no real difference. In this sense, it is perhaps understandable why Theresa May (apparently also at the urging of the Americans) didn't bother to tell anyone.

But on the other hand, it absolutely does matter that our Trident systems may not in fact be working, if nothing else because they cost so much. If you're going to have a deterrent that doesn't work, just spend a few hundred quid on a big magic rock that you say can summon revenging angels, or something – don't waste big bucks on some junk, especially if it's likely to veer off in the wrong direction and destroy East Anglia (I mean, obviously in the situation where it gets used the destruction of East Anglia might be imminent regardless, but still).

May, for her part, doesn't give the impression of particularly caring about any of these annoying details. During the Andrew Marr interview she quickly reverts to stock answers about how she's very big and tough and patriotic, and Jeremy Corbyn doesn't care about defending the country. In truth, May seems not to care at all about what the missiles might ever actually do: for her, the appearance is everything.

This indicates a more general truth about May – something which as yet has been a strength, but as time goes by could prove to be her biggest weakness. May is almost exclusively concerned about appearances. Accordingly, she has come to power by constructing a narrative as effective as it is shallow: May is a "safe pair of hands", the only politician capable of clearing up the mess David Cameron left after the referendum; the modest vicar's daughter whose Christian faith informs a compassionate, one-nation policy platform aimed at salving the woes of the victims of globalisation; the "New Iron Lady" who can take on Brussels and win the Brexit deal that works. But of course none of this is actually true: the NHS crisis shows up May's administration as disastrously incompetent; her attitude to refugee children displays about as much Christian charity as Scrooge in a fedora reading a copy of The God Delusion; and her negotiating strategy over Brexit is both dangerously risky and – from the perspective of Brussels, at least – incredibly entitled.

When it comes to reality, May seems almost pathologically disinterested. By reality of course, I mean the hard material facty stuff that, in the science fiction writer Philip K Dick's expression, refuses to go away when you stop believing in it. If you're going to lie well, you need to pay at least some attention to how things actually are, and construct a narrative so convincing that anyone who points out that you're wrong can be ridiculed – maybe even persecuted.

May doesn't seem to be capable of doing anything like this. Her response to both the Trident and NHS stories has been characterised by the brittle insistence that she's right and everyone else is wrong, but she has proved unable to express this insistence in the form of an argument, even a bad one. Likewise, her Brexit speech from last week seemed to anticipate her inability to respond to any scrutiny she might face by describing any detailed criticism of her plans as "not in the national interest". This might have seemed, to May and her team, like a clever way of covering their backs, but actually it just tells us precisely what we need to do.

Riding higher and higher in the polls after her Brexit speech, May's reign can seem insurmountable. But her disinterest in reality leaves her so brittle that, with just a little bit more scrutiny, she could quite easily snap.

@HealthUntoDeath

More from VICE:

Brexit Will Force Us to Face Up to the Grizzly Truth About Empire

Why So Many of Us Care More About American Politics Than Our Own

Corbyn's Article 50 Fiasco Shows Corbyn Still Has No Brexit Plan

Yesterday, a "very high" pollution alert was issued for London. This might not surprise you if you've witnessed any of the beautiful, smog-enhanced sunsets we've been having recently, or woken up coughing jet black phlegm into your fist. But it is a huge worry: 9,400 deaths a year in London are linked to pollution, and 500,000 Londoners under 19 live in areas that breach EU pollution limits.

Take Lambeth's Brixton Road: just five days into 2017 it had already surpassed its annual air pollution limit. The same goes for Knightsbridge and Putney High Street – two wealthy areas full of diesel-guzzling SUVs and 4x4s, which emit less pollution that causes climate change compared to petrol alternatives, but more pollution that's harmful to humans.

To find out which other areas are likely to soon breach their pollution limits I contacted the London Air Quality Network (LAQN), a pollution monitoring system run by King's College London that works with London councils. They explained that it's difficult to make exact predictions on which areas are most toxic and which are expected to be the worst due to various factors – one being weather and wind direction. Since pollution levels are monitored at the side of the road, one day the wind might blow the pollution away from the monitor and cause the system to reflect a low pollution level, while a change in wind direction the following day could cause the monitor to show that pollution levels had been breached. For this reason it's easiest to make predictions based on averages across the previous year.

The places I have photographed are some of those most likely to breach their pollution limits in 2017, according to the LAQN. These estimations were based off data reflecting how much they exceeded their limits by last year – if they went over the provisional hourly limits of N02 above 200ug/m3 for more than 18 hours in the year – though they're provisional as the LAQN is still ratifying the data. But essentially, what you need to know is: don't make a habit of hanging around by the road in any of these places, because it is not good for your health.

1: Knightsbridge

Knightsbridge has already breached the hourly limit for 2017, and went 222 hours above the limit in 2016

2: Euston Road, Camden

Euston Road exceeded the limit by 26 hours in 2016.

3: The Strand

The Strand exceeded the limit by 211 hours in 2016.

4: Oxford Street

Oxford Street exceeded the limit by 163 hours in 2016 – although this is a still-developing story: LAQN is investigating what happened here because the number last year fell from around 1,500 hours in previous years.

5: Brixton Road, Lambeth

Brixton Road has already breached its hourly limit in 2017. In 2016, it exceeded the limit by 502 hours.

6: Ikea, Brent

The area around Brent Ikea was 75 hours above the limit in 2016.

7: Hanger Lane gyratory

The Hanger Lane gyratory was 23 hours above the limit in 2016.

8: Putney High Street

Putney High Street has already breached its hourly limit in 2017, and was 1,248 hours above the limit in 2016.

In November of 2016 Sadiq Khan unveiled plans for the world's first double-decker hydrogen buses, and announced that no more pure diesel buses will added to the city's fleet. The same month, the government was told by the High Court that its plans to cut air pollution – which contributes to 50,000 early deaths nationally every year – were not good enough.

At the time, Theresa May said, "There is more to do and we will do it." However, what exactly it is they plan to do is yet to be seen.

@CBethell_photo

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences: What Do They Like? Do They Nominate Things?? Let's Find Out!

The 2017 Oscar nominations were announced this morning, and if you didn't get up at the near-literal crack of dawn to watch them announced in real time, we've got you covered. Check out all the noms below, and start your betting:

Best Supporting Actor

Mahershala Ali, Moonlight
Jeff Bridges, Hell or High Water
Lucas Hedges, Manchester By the Sea
Dev Patel, Lion
Michael Shannon, Nocturnal Animals

Best Cinematography

Arrival
La La Land
Lion
Moonlight
Silence

Best Documentary

Fire at Sea
I Am Not Your Negro
Life, Animated
O.J.: Made in America
13th

Best Short Documentary Feature

Extremis
4.1 Miles
Joe's Violin
Watani: My Homeland
The White Helmets

Best Foreign Language Film

Land of Mine
A Man Called Ove
The Salesman
Tanna
Toni Erdmann

Best Live Action Short Film

Ennemis Interieurs
La Femme et le TGV
Silent Nights
Sing
Timecode

Best Actor

Casey Affleck, Manchester by the Sea
Andrew Garfield, Hacksaw Ridge
Ryan Gosling, La La Land
Viggo Mortensen, Captain Fantastic
Denzel Washington, Fences

Best Sound Editing

Arrival
Deepwater Horizon
Hacksaw Ridge
La La Land
Sully

Best Sound Mixing

Arrival
Hacksaw Ridge
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story
La La Land
13 Hours

Best Production Design

Arrival
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Hail, Caesar!
La La Land
Passengers

Best Visual Effects

Deepwater Horizon
Doctor Strange
The Jungle Book
Kubo and the Two Strings
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Best Costume Design

Allied
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Florence Foster Jenkins
Jackie
La La Land

Best Makeup and Hairstyling

A Man Called Ove
Star Trek Beyond
Suicide Squad

Best Original Score

Jackie
La La Land
Lion
Moonlight
Passengers

Best Original Song

"Audition (The Fools who Dream)," La La Land
"Can't Stop the Feeling," Trolls
"City of Stars," La La Land
"The Empty Chair," Jim: the James Foley Story
"How Far I'll Go," Moana

Best Original Screenplay

Hell or High Water
La La Land
The Lobster
Manchester by the Sea
20th Century Women

Best Adapted Screenplay

Arrival
Fences
Hidden Figures
Lion
Moonlight

Best Animated Feature

Kubo and the Two Strings
Moana
My Life as a Zucchini
The Red Turtle
Zootopia

Best Animated Short

Blind Vaysha
Borrowed Time
Pear Cider and Cigarettes
Pearl
Piper

Best Supporting Actress

Viola Davis, Fences
Naomie Harris, Moonlight
Nicole Kidman, Lion
Octavia Spencer, Hidden Figures
Michelle Williams, Manchester by the Sea

Best Editing

Arrival
Hacksaw Ridge
Hell or High Water
La La Land
Moonlight

Best Lead Actress

Isabelle Huppert, Elle
Ruth Negga, Loving
Natalie Portman, Jackie
Emma Stone, La La Land
Meryl Streep, Florence Foster Jenkins

Best Director

Denis Villenueve, Arrival
Mel Gibson, Hacksaw Ridge
Damien Chazelle, La La Land
Kenneth Lonergan, Manchester by the Sea
Barry Jenkins, Moonlight

Best Picture

Arrival
Fences
Hacksaw Ridge
Hell or High Water
Hidden Figures
La La Land
Lion
Manchester by the Sea
Moonlight

The early 2000s were a vastly important time for cultural events: Michael Jackson died, YouTube and the iPod were founded, reality television became a thing, and Top of the Pops aired its final episode. And, at the same time in Iran, a significant underground music movement was beginning to blossom: Persian hip hop.

What started as a few Tehran based young artists imitating US hip hop – first rapping in English, then rapping in Farsi over US beats – eventually moved on to creating their own tracks and spitting in Farsi. For teenagers who lived in Iran, and for those who made up part of the roughly 80,000-deep Iranian diaspora in the UK, this phenomenon was massive. And for me, the genre gave me a deeper grasp of my mother tongue, even if only in the sense that I learned how to call someone a ho and talk about the universal phenomenon that is coke dick.

The two front-runners of the scene were arguably Hichkas, often called the Godfather of Iranian rap, and a group named Zedbazi, which formed in 2002. Hichkas combined hip-hop with elements from classical Iranian music: lyrically, he focused on social issues in Iran, steeped in nationalist tradition – and while his flow sounded aggressive, he avoided profanity. Zedbazi took the opposite approach and pioneered Iranian gangsta rap; becoming the first in a wave of musicians to swear and explicitly rap about sex and drugs, quickly achieving huge popularity among Iran's exceptionally young population (60 percent of the nation are thought to be under 30).

Read the rest of this article on Noisey.

We used to have a comments section and then we deleted it so we could write this article. I am serious. I am serious about this. We got the email a few weeks before the change. "RE: Comments Section," it read. "That cesspit, that awful pit of cess. We are closing it because it's just the same three lads called 'Ben' telling us VICE used to be better back in the old days." The email continued: "And so you can now write openly about aspects of the lifestyle of the middle class, safe in the knowledge that nobody will call you a 'sell out' or accuse you of being 'out of touch with the common ket-addled reader', at least as long you do not check the comments thread on Facebook, amen." It was a good email and I liked it. The change has negatively affected absolutely no one at all. We live, now, in utopia. Welcome to it.

And in that utopia we must talk about dinner parties, because you're probably 26 or thereabouts and you have been invited to one. This happens, and people don't talk about it: just like you turn 28 and realise all your mates are happily coupled up and have been for years and you, the last remaining all-singing, all-shagging singleton tearaway, get invited to four weddings in one summer and have a massive Tinder panic when you realise you've got a +1 to each and nobody to +1 with.

That is exactly the same as this, but a couple of years earlier and involving slightly more Le Creuset casserole dishes *1. Dinner party invites are a rite of passage for all adults to go through with a small quiver of panic when they realise they are many pegs behind the Great Adulthood Race than everyone else they know, love and live with, and the only real reaction to being invited to one is to sink one bottle of red beforehand and three additional bottles during and cry-vomit into the nearest downstairs bathroom as soon as someone says the word "profiteroles".

Here's how to have fun with it!

(All photos via Bruno Bayley)

WHAT DO YOU WEAR?

Guarantee you that if you turn up in the same "T-shirt, jeans, fucked up Classics" combination you cycle everywhere in then one half of the couple (it is a couple that has invited you to their house for a dinner party: this is the rule) (it is always a couple; imagine a single male inviting a few of you for dinner. "Alright? I'm making spaghetti al forno for a few pals. It's not a murder thing! Come over!" No) then one half of the couple will silently-but-also-not-very-silently sob behind the kitchen door and whisper-but-actually-very-loudly-say "I canNOT beLIEVE they showed up looking like that! This is WHY I hate your FRIENDS!" and the whole resulting atmosphere will be a write off. Wear a shirt or a dress, mate. It's not that much to ask.

WHAT DO YOU BRING?

I have had this text conversation circa one hundred thousand times now:

Hey! What shall I bring? Wine?

Great!

What colour? Of wine?

Well, we're having chicken for our main!

I don't know what that means!

Here's what you bring: one bottle of £8 wine, the one with the biggest punt in the bottom that you can find at that price point; two (two.) bags of Walkers Thai Sweet Chilli Sensations, the finest crisp known to man (you will have been told to turn up at 7.30PM ["sharp!"] for dinner: it will not be served until 9.15PM at the earliest, and you will want the crisps); and, if you really want, a box of M&S chocolates or something that makes you look like you go to these things a lot. All in, you can get this done for under £15, which for a full home-cooked dinner (with wine) in return is a pretty good deal.

AH, SHIT, A WINE CUNT

Ah, shit. Shit. There's a wine cunt here, being a cunt about wine. Shirt sleeves rolled up to the elbow, buttons to the top of his chest. Deep tan from a trip to the south of France. That sort of thing. He's insisting on there being a decanter. "No decanter?" he's shrieking, folding his shirt sleeves up an extra inch. "Right: we need a clean, dry vase, or I can use that big mason jar you use for your muesli. It needs to aerate!" Is he… crying? "This is a 2004, Michael! We need to get some air in here!"

Wine cunts are often the worst of all the cunts because only wine cunts hold a single stemmed glass up to the grimy light of your mate's IKEA-and-a-sofa-so-old-it-needs-a-throw-over-it-to-disguise-that-big-bolognese-stain flat and go "look at the legs on that one". He's making you smell the wine before you drink it. He's doing a big, flappy arm gesture and saying "deep berry". He… he wants you to drink the wine in a special way where you run it over your tongue but you just get confused and accidentally spit it out a little bit? Oh god, no: he's reaching for the Casillero del Diablo you bought in a blue bag from the corner shop. "Hmm," he's saying, tapping his lips together, running his tongue through his mouth. "Hmm, yes: big, big, earthy flavours." Haha! He doesn't know anything! Liking wine is for dickheads!

COMPLIMENT THE COOKING BUT DON'T GO TOO OVER THE TOP WITH IT

I am convinced that cooking for someone in the greatest act of love you can ever perform – and yes I am including butt stuff on that list! And mouth! – because it nourishes, it warms, it soothes, it very literally keeps you alive. When someone makes you a thick tomato-y sauce – enriched with fat pancetta, finished with just a dab of cream, served on soft, yolky pasta – they are basically saying, "I want you to live, and I want you to live marvellously." Anyone who spends 40 minutes chopping things to make something you consume in less than 180 seconds is basically sacrificing their time and care for a brief moment of your enjoyment. So when someone cooks you something you say, "Thank you, thank you, a thousand times thank you," and also: "Mmm! Yeah, this is— what have you put in there? Salt?" and point to it with your fork.

Stop there, though. Don't be like, "Can I have seconds? Thirds?" Do not lick the plate. The thing if you over-compliment cooking is that someone will get up halfway through the meal and start making you a packed lunch for work tomorrow, and that is a nightmare. You cannot do that to someone. That sweet person, who slaved so long and hard over your dinner, making you a lunch too. "It's… this is one of our good Tupperwares, I would like it back" – oh no. "I've done a little pitta bread wrapped up in tin foil here, too – just unwrap it and pop it in the toaster or microwave at work" – oh this is too much, too much. "Shall I do you a little pot with some olive oil in, do a little drizzle of olive oil?" – obviously yes. And a slice of cake for pudding, too. But that's it. That's all I'm letting you pack me.

THE BIT WHERE SOMEONE GETS AN ADULT BOARD GAME OUT AND GOES 'NO, DON'T GR— IT'S REALLY WELL REVIEWED!'

At some point someone is going to get an adult board game out, because it's 2017 and this is what we do now. Am I a big enough man to admit I have played – and enjoyed! – Settlers of Catan? I am. Am I big enough to say I like The Resistance, both the version set in space and the version set in olden times? Yes I am. Do I still get a horrible clunk of dread when someone gets Cards Against Humanity out? Yes I do. What I am saying is I know and like adult board games. That is who I am. That is the kind of man I am. Here's a thing I have said before: "Ooh, Monopoly? Bagsy the Scottie Dog!" That's me. I'll admit that.

The thing, though, about breaking an adult board game out at a dinner party is it only goes one way, which is "someone has to read the instructions in full for 20 minutes before a single hand is played, the first game takes an hour and you're never quite sure who it is who won, and then the second game – actual game – gets so bizarrely competitive that someone sprints to the toilet to anger-cry when they lose the Sha'harn Wastelands to a coordinated power coup". When someone brings a heavy box and shakes it in that fun board game way, just know that you're not getting out of here without someone flipping a game board and saying "FUCKYUNT!", an enraged portmanteau of "fuck" and "cunt".

THE CHEESE COURSE

There is never enough cheese on the cheese course. Bring your own bit of Brie if you have to. Put an entire Stilton in your handbag. If someone palms you off with two types of cheddar and an old jar of Branston Pickle, then riot. Riot. Set fire to their flat.

THE GREAT 'OFFER TO WASH UP' CONUNDRUM

The thing with offering to wash up is there is a very real danger that someone will take you up on your offer to wash up, and then you'll be left having to wash up. This cannot be allowed to happen.

But then, if you just sit there and drink wine like an unhelpful dickhead – especially if someone else very loudly and actively does the washing up – then you lose the game, too. There is an unspoken transaction at play during a dinner party: I, the dinner party haver, will make and prepare you a delicious dinner; in return, you, the dinner party doer, will do the washing up. But you don't want to do the washing up, do you? Because I've burnt a load of pork to the bottom of one pan and somehow used three different grill trays. So what to do. What to do?

Novices, at this hurdle – and I am including you in this – novices ask if they can "help at all" with the washing up. Then they get to do the washing up, in full, and get absolutely no kudos for it. Me (the expert, the great guy), I know how to play this game, so I win. In that post-pudding lull, you suddenly leap up from the table and say, "RIGHT: WASHING UP!" then take some plates and start washing up.

It unfolds two ways from here and you always win:

WAY ONE: You do the washing up, entirely. At first this sounds bad – you had to wash a cheese grater, man! You can't get your hand down the inside of that! – but also you get props for doing the washing up. "Oh, thank you," your host says, "thank you, thank you. You did the washing up." At the next dinner party – there will always be another one – they will point to you and say, "And you are so good for doing the washing up – always washing up, at parties! The party washer upper!" This is your legend now. This is your name. With one act of washing up you are assured kudos for it forever.

WAY TWO: They go, "Oh, don't worry about the washing up. I'll do the washing up tomorrow." And then you don't have to do the washing up, but you still get points for attempting to do the washing up.

?????? DID I JUST HACK DINNER PARTIES??????????? I THINK I FUCKING DID, YEAH!!!!!!!!!

THE RIGMAROLE OF TIDYING EVERYTHING AWAY TO MAKE A BIG TABLE

Ah, shit, you've made the mistake of having a dinner party at your own flat, the least-equipped place for this sort of thing on Earth. Do you have a tablecloth? Come on, mate. No. Of course you don't. Did you email all your flatmates to say this would be happening and to keep the kitchen clear? You did, but Rob forgot, but he'll mainly be in his room Skyping his Canadian girlfriend. Do you... even know how to make rice? Why have you done this? Why have you invited this hell down upon yourself?

"Yeah I said bring wine, but... yeah, I guess that'll. Yeah."

YOU HAVE SO INEVITABLY BEEN SAT NEXT TO AN INCREDIBLY BORING MAN CALLED STEWART

Doesn't matter what time you turn up to this thing, you're always the second person there, because someone's posh mate from uni is already stretched like an eagle across the corner settee, arms extended over both sides, slowly sipping wine and greeting you with a soft nod of "Hey." Is… are we the only people here? Me and this weird Stewart guy? Ahh. Ah, fucking hell. Ah, I've got to sit next to him.

Stewart is the kind of dude who, when there's a lull in conversation, breathes so deeply through his nose that you can hear it and goes: "So… what do you do?" Stewart is putting you on the spot about some news story about Europe you've pretended you read about on BBC News and is sincerely asking your opinion. Your opinion is "extraordinary", Stewart says, then turns away. Stewart is recounting a university memory that is clearly very important to him because it's taken him 20 minutes to tell it so far, but is neglecting to explain to you who a single person involved is, so you're just drinking wine in silence and trying to resist checking your phone. The hosts have to plate pudding up together, which just leaves you, alone in a room with Stewart, for the next ten minutes. No. You're better than this. Tell him you need a shit and go and check Instagram in the bathroom for a bit.

TO NOSE OR NOT TO NOSE

While you're in there you can of course amuse yourself by looking through the medicine cupboards, because nothing is as entertaining as learning one of your friends has topical eczema. Ah, what's this… someone needs to change their razor head! Should I tell him, or should I let him continue to shave himself pink and raw every morning? I think I shall… not tell him. Ooh, a single slightly wet condom packet. Latex-free? Wonder who has the allergy. Guess I'll never know. Guess I'll never, ever know.

PREPARING FOR THE KIND OF DISTURBING COOK A FRIEND YOU THOUGHT YOU KNEW TURNS OUT TO BE

There are two types of cook who will invite you to a dinner party: Heston Blumenthal-esque odd cunts who do something mad with a sous vide and tell you that a sauce you're eating that tastes quite a lot like passata with a bit of celery in it "actually took 18 hours to make"; and people who serve you a large amount of food served on an enormous wooden platter with a load of half-torn basil leaves over the top, who if you compliment the food will simply smile a beaming, cultish grin, all teeth no frowning, and say a single word, an incantation to the gods: "Jamie." Jamie's got us all twisted. Jamie's got us all hitting the flat side of a blade over a clove of garlic and saying "bosh". Jamie's got us slowly running thin waves of pasta dough through a special Jamie-branded pasta machine. If you go to someone's house to eat, you are eating Jamie. You are tearing a piece of bread from the larger loaf and trusting that when it enters your mouth it becomes His flesh. Jamie. Jamie Jamie Jamie. Jamie.

AH, OK: A CAT

You are in your twenties and you've been invited to someone's house for dinner, which means you are essentially being invited to someone's attempt to play at being an adult before taking a full run at doing it properly, and that means they have a cat with a curiously adult name who they treat like it is their actual child. "Ah, here's Ludo!" they say, as a cat stomps across your lap. You try to stroke him but he just flops his head on your hand, falls over sideways and hisses at you. "Don't mind him. He doesn't like strangers, do you Ludo?" Ludo has dived into your rucksack and fished out your keys and is now running across a high windowsill with them, threatening to drop them out of it. "We speak to Ludo in French and English, ne nous Ludo?" Ludo does a really brisk savoury shit in the bathroom and the smell floods the house. You find one of Ludo's whiskers in the main course. "We love you, Ludo, don't we don't we don't we?" The cat just stares at you, man. What the fuck is this guy's problem? Man. Hope the actual kid they end up having is less of a dick than this.

THE WEIRD BIT WHERE YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THIS… DO WE… MAKE THE CALL?

Every other time you have been in this house it's been at 1AM at the earliest at the headache-y bit on a night out where you're all kind of pumped and the blood is going faster and the sweat sticks your T-shirt to your chest and you all get a little blue bag of tins and maybe some share-sized bags of crisps and then Make The Call and stay up until 7AM minimum listening to nü rave on YouTube and doing frankly appalling quantities of gak. Only… I dunno, man. I've had a really large amount of gravy. Should we—? Only, I'm kind of watching my money this month. I dunno. Should we—? I dunno. I dunno: I'll leave it up to you. I'll leave the decision up to you. Yeah. No, I'm not— I'll leave the decision up to you. And then you end up doing loads of gear and washing it down with port, don't you? You filthy little dog.

THAT BIT WHERE YOU HAVE TO PUT A SCARF ON AND KISS EVERYONE GOODNIGHT FOR SOME REASON AND PRETEND YOU ARE EVER GOING TO DO THIS AGAIN

Civilised nights end with civilised goodbyes, which is why your mate's girlfriend who you've known for four years and never had more than a 20-second conversation with before suddenly wants to give you a full-on actual hug and kiss goodbye, then really sincerely turns away from you and says both to the room and no one in particular, "We should do this again some time." Should we? You're battered on wine and you've got a see-thru Tesco bag full of foil-wrapped pork with you, but did you have a nice time? I suppose you did, in a way. I mean, it's no "going to the pub and chatting shit for hours and getting steaming", but it's OK. Do you want to do this again? Let the question sit in the air a second, allow it to settle. The first person to blink loses. The first person to make the move is the one who— ah, fucksake. You've just said, "Maybe we can do it round my place next time!" and someone has brightly said "IT'S A DATE!" and the next morning at 9AM sharp you get a "Sore head? Ha ha me too. Here are the next seven Tuesdays we have free – let me know what's good for you?" and that's it, now, you're going to have to go on BBC Good Food and panic-learn how to mash a potato. You only have three plates. You didn't think this through at all, did you? You didn't think this through at all.

@joelgolby

1*. Seriously, do you realise how much a Le Creuset casserole dish even is? Have you ever Googled one? One hundred and forty clams, my brother. If anyone makes you food in a Le Creuset casserole dish you must get on your knees and orally thank them while they mutter, "Of course, it'll last a lifetime, so really it's an investment" over and over again until climax.

The past few days were filled with many memorable moments. Trump was sworn in as the 45th president of the United States. Protesters took to the streets of cities across the country to fight for women's rights. And Richard Spencer, the alt-right figurehead and white supremacist, was punched in the face on camera.

The footage of Spencer flooded social media and quickly became a popular meme, but it also sparked a major debate. Is it OK to punch someone... even if this person is a Nazi?

Some argued that even though Richard Spencer is a horrible person, it's still not cool to knock him out—including an ethicist that VICE recently interviewed. However, VICELAND's Desus and Mero disagree, saying that it's totally fine to kick some major bigoted ass.

Be sure to catch new episodes weeknights at 11:30 PM ET/PT on VICELAND.

Everything you need to know about the world this morning, curated by VICE.

US News

Mike Pompeo Becomes CIA Director
Mike Pompeo was confirmed as the new director of the CIA by the United States Senate on Monday. Previously a Republican congressman, Pompeo has been a firm supporter of expanding the government's capacity to gather US citizens' communications. Democrats had delayed proceedings for three days, arguing the appointment needed more scrutiny, but Pompeo was confirmed by a vote of 66–32.—NBC News

Trump Signals Intentions with Three Presidential Memoranda
President Donald Trump signed three memoranda on his first full day in the Oval Office. The president called for the withdrawal of the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and ordered a freeze on the hiring of new federal workers, exempting the military. He also moved to strengthen a law banning the federal funding of foreign organizations that promote abortions, as most Republican presidents do.—ABC News

EPA Puts Grants Program on Hold
The Environmental Protection Agency has reportedly asked staff not to fund any new projects while the agency's grants program is placed on hold. It is unclear whether the freeze on grants, given to research, education, and environmental monitoring projects, will be temporary or part of major budget cuts at the agency.—The Huffington Post

Trump Declares January 20, 2017, 'Patriotic Devotion' Day
President Trump has declared the day of his inauguration a "National Day of Patriotic Devotion." A decree uploaded to the Federal Register states the day was designed to "strengthen our bonds to each other and to our country—and to renew the duties of Government to the people."—The Washington Post

International News

Major Powers Push for Renewed Ceasefire Deal in Syria
Russia, Turkey, and Iran—the major powers involved in Syrian peace talks in Kazakhstan—are trying to finalize a communique that might strengthen a ceasefire in the war-torn country. "We noticed a real understanding on the part of the Russians," said Yahya al-Aridi, a spokesman for the rebel opposition.—Reuters

Dutch PM Tells People to Act 'Normally' or Leave
Mark Rutte, the prime minister of the Netherlands, said anyone who does not accept the country's customs should leave. In a full-page newspaper advertisement, Rutte told people to "behave normally, or go away," widely seen as an attempt to win back voters from Geert Wilders's anti-immigration Freedom Party ahead of March 15 elections.—The Guardian

Female Suicide Bombers Using Babies, Nigeria Warns
Nigerian officials are warning of a "dangerous" trend of female suicide bombers carrying babies. A bombing attack in Madagali earlier in January, believed to be organized by the Boko Haram militant group, was apparently conducted by two women who carried babies past a checkpoint before detonating their bombs. They killed themselves, the two babies, and four more people.—BBC News

UK Government Must Get Parliamentary Approval for Brexit
The UK's Supreme Court has ruled that the British government must get the approval of parliament to actually trigger the country's exit from the European Union. The 8-3 ruling by judges means PM Theresa May might now have to delay plans to invoke Article 50 to trigger formal Brexit negotiations by the end of March.—AP

Everything Else

Stephen Colbert to Host 2017 Emmys
Stephen Colbert will host the Emmys later this year, CBS has announced. Mocking the White House press secretary, Sean Spicer, Colbert said, "This will be the largest audience to witness an Emmys, period. Both in person and around the globe."—TIME

$20 Million Found Hidden in Box-Spring Bed
The US attorney's office in Boston has released a photo of $20 million police found inside a box spring bed in a Massachusetts apartment. Officials said the money is connected to an investigation into an alleged pyramid scheme involving TelexFree.—CBS News

Sean Spicer Once Called Daft Punk 'Daft Funk'
White House press secretary Sean Spicer's old tweets have revealed his interest in Daft Punk's career, despite getting the group's name wrong. Apparently Tweeting about the 2014 Grammys, Spicer said, "Daft Funk -- this is your 10 seconds in the spotlight - u r blowing it."—Noisey

Hacker Claims DDoS Attack on British Bank
A hacker has claimed responsibility for a reported distributed-denial-of-service (DDoS) attack against the UK bank Lloyds earlier this month. The hacker also claims he attempted to extort from $93,000 from the bank—in bitcoin, of course.—Motherboard

Canadian Student Is Doing a PhD (Partly) on Drake
Amara Pope, a 22-year-old student from the University of Western Ontario, is embarking on a PhD on the cultural, religious, and ethnic identity of Drake, along with Rihanna and Jay-Z. Pope said she will "focus on the part of [Drake's] career that catapulted him to success."—VICE

We've seen some amazing forms of protest since Trump officially became president—namely, the Women's March, which mobilized millions around the world in a spectacular display of solidarity.

On January 20, Trump's inauguration also sparked a very peculiar form of protest, however—the setting up of a Twitter account for half an onion in a Ziploc bag with the goal of getting more followers than than the president. In the days since, @halfonioninabag has gained over 200,000 followers and is still quickly growing in popularity. VICE spoke to the human behind the account. (Though he has requested to remain anonymous, we have independently verified his identity.)

VICE: Why did you set up the Half An Onion account?
Half An Onion: [laughs] I started it out of complete and total frustration. I turned on the TV on inauguration day, and I guess the best word for it was I was disgusted. I think it finally felt real that day, and it had felt real before that, but something about that kind of triggered me. So I just started thinking about what I could do at this moment here and now… What would be the most annoying thing to this man who has this massive ego who really cares about ridiculous things like a Twitter following?

What if I put him head-to-head with a ridiculous object and it gained some traction? That began a search through my house as to what that object should be. When I opened my fridge and saw a beautiful half onion in a bag, I said, "That's the one." I took the picture on my kitchen counter, I created the account, and I got to work with it.

Why did you specifically pick half an onion?
It was the object that made me laugh most… The fact that it was half, in a Ziploc bag, and there were little bits of broccoli on it—I was like, this is perfect.

Have you used the onion since you took the photo?
Yes, the onion has been used since then. I believe it was in a veggie omelette, so it had some company in there.

Would you consider this a form of protest?
Yeah, I would. I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I don't want to claim that it's that serious, but I do think it's a way for people to show that they are not OK with this. I know these things have short lives; I'm not expecting much from it. But if a lot of people come together, and if it can kind of be a place that takes a look at these next four years with humour and can poke fun and also be a place where people can come together and do good things, work together—I would love for it to be that in the long run.

Can you share any angry messages you've gotten on the account?
You'd be surprised at some of the profanity people would throw at an onion. I've definitely gotten some things I've never been called before… I've been called a "cunt," I've been called a "faggot," I've been called the worst of the worst, and it's for no reason. It's just a funny account, but people get riled up and protective and defensive.

As an American, how do you feel about the next four years?
I think I feel the way a lot of people seem to feel. I'm scared and concerned, but feeling much more motivated than I have in the past to speak up and do things about it. I think if there is a silver lining with everything that is happening, it's that it's bringing that out in a lot of people, and it's incredible to see. With Saturday, and [the Women's March] turnout all around the world, it's unbelievable. I guess I'm scared, but I'm loving what I'm seeing from people who are also feeling the same way.

Other than following Half An Onion, what do you think people who are dissatisfied with the current state of the government in the US should do?
I wish I had the answer to that, but I'm hoping I can turn this into something where we can introduce people to options and what they can be doing, as well as having fun with it. Stay tuned and see what we can do with this following and see if we can find a place for people to fight back.

So you're planning on using the account in the future for something more, correct?
Yeah, like I said, I don't know how much longer people will care about it. I know how these things operate, but if all these people are interested in that and it can turn into something like that, I don't want to lose the humour on there, but I also would love if any charities or organizations wanted to reach out and we could come up with a way to work together—absolutely, I'd be all for it. I think a lot of the people who follow me for the humour would be up for that as well.

What will happen if the account actually does get more followers than President Trump?
I look forward to him calling a press conference because of it. That would be the greatest thing in the world and ridiculous. The fact that we're even discussing that that would be an option to bother him and piss him off just kind of shows you the kind of person we're dealing with here. But if it got that far… It's very powerful, I see it as an alternate voice against this administration, but we'll see. It's got a very long way to go.

Follow Allison Tierney on Twitter .

And if you want to piss off President Cheeto, follow @halfonioninabag.

Recent debate about Hollywood whitewashing has sparked conversation on how difficult it is for Asian performers to land a role free of stereotypes—never mind a leading role in a blockbuster. But Disney's upcoming live action reboot of Mulan—which will reportedly feature an all-Chinese cast— could set a precedent on how Asian actors are cast in Hollywood films.

When Matt Damon appeared in The Great Wall's trailer, Fresh off The Boat actress Constance Wu slammed the Hollywood-Chinese co-production for perpetuating the myth that only a white man can save the world. "Our heroes don't look like Matt Damon," she said.

Even an actor as popular as Steven Yeun from The Walking Dead isn't spared from Hollywood's discrimination. According to comic Bobby Lee, Yeun was at an audition where he only had five lines. "I guarantee you right now that Aaron Paul would not audition for five lines," Lee said on TigerBelly, his podcast where the story was told.

In the same episode of Lee's podcast, Margaret Cho, a comic who starred in the first Asian-American sitcom on network TV, explained how Tilda Swinton reached out to her to discuss the fury over Swinton's casting as the Ancient One in Doctor Strange, which was originally written as a Tibetan character . Cho said the experience made her feel like a "house Asian," following Swinton around with an umbrella during the email consult. Swinton later released the emails, a conversation she requested to be private, and it ends by saying that she's making "the first ever half Korean/half English speaking film" starring Yeun. Lee joked that Swinton was using the black friend card when talking about the film project.

"We don't accept black face in any of its forms in film or television, why would we accept yellow face?" Cho said in an interview after the emails.

So the magnitude of outrage come as no surprise when an anonymous Asian-American industry insider revealed in a guest post on The Angry Asian Man that The Legend of Mulan's spec script had a European merchant, with a case of yellow fever, ogling over Mulan and eventually saving ancient China.

What followed was #MakeMulanRight, social media's negative response to the script's call for a white saviour. VICE talked to Sarah Chang and Simu Liu, two Canadian actors vying for roles in Mulan, about why this reboot is so significant to them and other Asian-American actors.  

Sarah Chang auditions for 'The Legend of Mulan'

For Chang and Liu, the 1998 version of Mulan meant mainstream representation as kids. Before black haired Barbies and the plethora of Asian YouTube stars who make a living by mocking their immigrant parents lovingly, there was Mulan. In pop culture, other than Wanda from The Magic School Bus or the Yellow Ranger, Mulan was it. She was on the big screen, speaking English without an accent and, finally, wasn't the sidekick mathlete. The animation wasn't esoteric like the folklores taught at weekend Mandarin school—those recited to explain the order of the Chinese zodiac or the lion dance's origins.

Chang told VICE that seeing a leading Asian character inspired her to continue pursuing Wushu, a form of contemporary martials arts, in which she's trained for under action star Jet Li's teammate Zhang Guifeng since she was a little girl in McLean, Virginia.

For Asian millennials, General Li Shang—a Chinese army captain and Mulan's love interest—represented an Asian male that wasn't meek, but a hero.

Liu, currently seen on CBC's Kim's Convenience and as Faaron on NBC's Taken, said that as a teenager he had a lot of trouble dating because he felt like Asian men were desexualized by the media. His crush in fifth grade giggled over boy band members who had blonde hair and frosted tips, which made him want to be like Justin Timberlake so girls would dig him a little more.

It's a problem that a lot of Asian kids growing up will face, invariably making them feel invisible in Western pop culture, he said.

Although Li Shang isn't a real person, the animated character in Mulan is a sexy Chinese man, Liu added. With a gallery of topless selfies on social media, Liu wants to prove that Chinese men can be universally attractive too.

"Chinese people deserve to be as vain and as narcissistic as anyone else," Liu told VICE. "I refuse to be pigeon-holed into this model minority, the nerdy sidekick."

The former stuntman for Hero's Reborn says it's been a dream of his to take on the role of Li Shang. 

"It's not every day that Disney decides to adapt an animated feature into a big motion picture and not every day that the motion picture centres around Chinese people," said Liu. 

Simu Liu: 'I'm very proud of my heritage.'

Born in Harbin, China, Liu gravitated toward martial arts at a young age since icons like Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan were Asian male figures that were treated with respect and reverence instead of being depicted with racist caricatures, he said. Even with his eager attitude, Liu's parents put him into piano and soccer lessons instead. 

Other than trading Pokémon cards at Mandarin school during his childhood in Mississauga, Ontario, Liu learned the language despite his refusal to speak it at home, only responding in English when spoken to.

Yet he still set out to be the perfect Asian child, graduating with an accounting degree and settling into a 9-to-5 job. But after being laid off in 2012, Liu refused to head back to Bay Street (Canada's version of Wall Street) and was instead obsessively scrolling through Craigslist for acting gigs––stepping onto a set made him feel like he was finally in control of his own life. 

According to Chang, Mulan is a spiritual role model, as an independent woman and a highly skilled warrior. It follows that her hustle to become Mulan has been relentless. She enlisted the help of Beijing Film Academy speech teacher Zhang Hua, who coached mega star Zhao Wei in the Chinese live action version of Mulan, to prepare her for auditions. She consulted Zhao Qing Jian, former Wushu World Champion and someone who has been called "The God Of Wushu," on her performance technique.

And with the help of some friends, Chang filmed a teaser trailer titled The Rise of Mulan to send in as part of her follow up audition.

Chang's even been on the radar of China's CCTV producers. The state television station aired a documentary in December on her quest to become Mulan with behind the scenes footage of her audition preparations and training routine.

The rebooted Mulan is not due on November 2018 but for Liu, he's hopeful that progress will continue to be made.

Liu, a recent nominee of two Canadian Screen Awards, said diversity in Hollywood will advance, but at a staggered pace.

"We know what we have to do, we know the progress that there is out there to make and we're just doing it," Liu said. "We have allies and people that aren't so friendly, but I'm very proud of my heritage."

Follow Amy on Twitter

The US government is never going to be overthrown, right? People don't even think about forcibly removing the president from office the way the leaders of some other countries have been deposed over the years. Well, some bankers did talk about removing FDR at the height of the Great Depression, but that plot didn't get very far.

But imagine a crazy America, one where the new president, a notoriously temperamental and dishonest oligarch, had just won a squeaker of a victory after an election that amounted to a year and a half of bitter struggle for the entire country. This president faces fights from a media he loathes and regularly attacks, his government's own intelligence agencies, a mass protest movement, an opposition that questions his legitimacy, and members of his own party who strongly disagree with him on some issues.

Meanwhile, this president has broken precedent by appointing several former generals to help run the government. One of these generals is almost universally supported by the same media outlets who oppose the new president. Add this all up—the unpopularity, the unrest, the generals, the feuding with the deep state—and if it were any other country, you'd normally ask if there was a coup on its way.

Experts who study coups don't think one is in the cards for the US. Natasha Ezrow, a senior lecturer on government at the UK's University of Essex and a commentator on authoritarianism, emphasized that "a coup is completely unlikely." Tom Ginsburg, a scholar of coups and professor of law at the University of Chicago, felt the same way as Ezrow—he published a paper to that effect earlier this month. But, he added, "We're at this moment where it's very good to be considering these things."

Bearing in mind that a coup is not about to happen, Ezrow and Ginsburg helped me game out this crazy hypothetical. So here's how a coup would go:

Step 1: Everyone Opposes the President

Joseph Wright, associate professor of political science at Pennsylvania State University, found the whole concept too insane to even discuss in depth. For the seeds of a coup to even exist, it would have to seem like it was universally regarded as possible and a good idea, he explained, and in Washington, DC, a coup d'etat is not on anyone's list of things that are possible. His point highlights the incredibly rare and specific circumstances that might lead to a coup even making sense in the United States.

"The only type of coup that I foresee happening in the US," Ezrow told me, "is something that would take place behind-the-scenes with key members of the military and key Republican elites agreeing that Trump would need to step down, resulting in Trump resigning." By her reasoning, the military would be the force behind the coup, but they would immediately hand power over to Vice President Mike Pence, or—if Pence remains loyal to his boss—House Speaker Paul Ryan.

But what if they asked Trump nicely to step down, and he didn't want to?

Step 2: Every Other Option Has Been Exhausted

Congress, now allied with the military in this hypothetical, would still have other tools at its disposal, like impeachment—which is slow and unreliable—or a declaration that the president is unfit to carry out his duties under the 25th Amendment. The coup would have to seem like a better option than these. For that to be the case, the president would have to have signaled that he wouldn't step down, even if asked to resign.

Now presumably, Trump could be forced to leave without a coup taking place. After all, the Secret Service would presumably side with the military if Trump were unpopular enough to create all these rumblings of dissent. Trump would need to surround himself with a loyal presidential guard entirely under private control. (As it happens, during the transition, Trump did just that.)

"If you had the military and the Congress together they could do pretty much anything they wanted to," Ginsburg told me. But once a careful plan for overthrowing the president existed, he suggested that the plotters would still need a global-level emergency to justify the suspension of democracy.

Step 3: The Military Tells Trump He's Not President Anymore

Trump would have to do something that threatened humanity to catalyze an uprising. "Nuclear war with China or something," Ginsburg suggested. Basically, Trump would have to start a world war that no one wanted. The coup—if it's going to succeed—would likely be an attempt to demonstrate to the world that this isn't our guy anymore.

This means that those who carry out the coup make a big public show of being more reasonable and logical than Trump. They would have to represent stability and order, because the whole thing would make Americans very, very nervous.

Step 4: The Coup Plotters Make Their Pitch to America

Ginsburg said coup leaders generally promise—at least at first—a speedy return to democracy. "There's such veneration for the Constitution," he told me, that whatever general was the face of the coup would have to tell the American people, "We're just a temporary regime, here to set things right again." Coups in other countries often suspend, or rewrite constitutions, but a leader who advocated suspending America's "would generate a huge backlash," Ginsburg told me.

"The day a coup is announced, the coup plotters first have to gain control over the means of communication and communicate clearly over the radio and TV that a coup has taken place," according to Ezrow.

As the idea of the coup solidifies in the minds of the American people, there may be media suppression, with the military scrutinizing communication in more obvious ways than usual, and maybe making its presence known on the internet—but probably not shutting the internet down. According to Ginsburg, "it can be your friend, of course, because you can figure out who's your antagonist by monitoring the traffic." In either case, he told me, if you're a coup plotter, you want to know and control what people are saying in order to "prevent the media from really mobilizing people against you."

Step 5: There's Pushback from Trump Supporters

So far, we've been talking about an operation with popular support (remember, the president has completely flipped his lid). But regime change would never really be that tidy, and a lot of people would perceive the coup as being a power grab—which it would be, of course. Some people might oppose a coup because coups are bad, while others would remain loyal to the president out of a love for him personally. "In coups where there is some instability and violence, there can be trials and execution of cronies and associates," according to Ezrow.

According to Ginsburg, the military needs to win over the justice system at all possible levels. "Some federal judge somewhere could decide on a habeas petition that the president should be released from jail, and then you'd have your competition again." On top of that, he pointed out, "there are tens of thousands of police departments, which have the authority to use force, and 50 different state governments, which have to authorize them to do so."

As long as the courts back the coup, any Trump supporters who take to the streets and exercise a very literal interpretation of their Second Amendment rights—to form a militia and fight government tyranny—don't stand much of a chance. The federal government is usually hesitant to use force against armed groups like the Bundys, but those groups never pose an existential threat to the dominant regime. "If it were really a high-stakes situation where they thought their regime was at risk, they would've been toast," Ginsburg said.

Step 6: Trump Stages His Last Stand

In this case, Trump may be rich enough to hire mercenaries to fight for him, and his support among the members of military indicates that he'll have some trained soldiers willing to join any anti-coup effort. But if the country's top brass is united against Trump, his fighting force, whoever it is made of, would eventually have to surrender.

"If the leader clings to power, they are usually killed," Ezrow told me. "Unless an assassination has taken place, there is usually an ultimatum allowing the leader to vacate and live a life in exile, if they are willing to step down peacefully."

Ginsberg begs to differ about exile: "When you're doing a coup, you want to definitely isolate the leader, and you want to presumably have him under your control. I don't think there'd be any reason to exile him in the United States." Instead, he told me, if the president were still alive, "You'd have to somehow charge him with some crimes and lock him up."

Step 7: The New Regime Tries to Rule the Country

According to Ezrow's research, North and South America have seen 145 coups, and they've had a 48.3 percent success rate. Most continents' success rates also hover around 50 percent, except for Europe, where only 33.3 percent have worked out for the coup plotters. "A coup in a country that has never had a coup before could result in a lot of instability and protest against the coup plotters," she said.

If it's successful, she told me, a functioning government will materialize, but it "usually takes several weeks."

Those several weeks of chaos, plus the shocking sight of a president being exiled or imprisoned or killed in combat, plus the crackdowns on communication, plus the break with two centuries of peaceful transfers of power, plus the on-the-ground conflicts between coup supporters and those who oppose it, would all be disastrous for the country, probably even worse than anything a president could do. Good thing none of this will happen!

Follow Mike Pearl on Twitter.

Donald Trump is expected to sign two executive actions Tuesday that would advance the construction of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, Politico reports.

Both pipelines have faced intense opposition from environmental groups and Native American tribes concerned that construction could wreak havoc on the environment and continue the country's reliance on fossil fuels. Obama rejected TransCanada Corp's Keystone pipeline in 2015 and halted construction on Energy Transfer Partners LP's 1,000-mile Dakota Access Pipeline in December after enormous protests at the Sioux tribe's Standing Rock reservation.

On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline, which would bring crude oil from Alberta, Canada, down to Texas and proponents believe could create more jobs. He also said he supported the Dakota Access Pipeline, despite the Standing Rock protests.

According to Bloomberg, TransCanada would have to submit another application to build the Keystone pipeline and would have to convince the new administration of its benefit to the US, despite already being vetted and rejected under Obama.

Trump outlined his views on environmental issues on Tuesday in a meeting with various auto executives, NBC News reports.

"I am, to a large extent, an environmentalist," he said. "I believe in it, but it's out of control."

We're tracking the laws and executive orders Trump signs in his first year in office. The updated list is here.

It's no secret that the business of pot in Toronto has been pretty chaotic, as of late. As much peace of mind that the drug brings to many of us, it turns out that dispensaries haven't been sharing the same tranquil experience recently.

So far in 2017 alone, there have been four major pot robberies—that the public officially knows about. Dispensaries have been stripped of their inventory and two places didn't call the cops.

In two of the robberies, suspects came in with guns loaded. In another case, the suspects also sported knives. According to Supt. Bryce Evans, who spoke with the CBC, employees and customers have been "stabbed, pistol-whipped, pepper-sprayed." Needless to say, it's been an experience that has shaken many dispensaries. "There's no doubt employees and customers have been traumatized by these violent, armed robberies," said Supt. Evans.

As nerve-wracking as these robberies are, they don't come as a surprise. In 2016, there were a total of 13 (known) robberies in the Toronto area. According to cops, six of those went unreported.

Read More: Canadians and Americans Spent $72 Billion on Weed Last Year

It's understandable that dispensaries are hesitant about coming forward and informing the police about robberies given that the police are just as likely to raid them. Cops and the weed business have an "it's complicated" relationship status, to say the least. Supt. Evans said on Monday that previous Toronto Police dispensary raids were done with accordance to the law as "marijuana dispensaries are illegal," although that stance might be confusing to Torontonians who see fancy, new dispensaries open for business on virtually every commercial street in the city.

Inst. Steve Watts said, "This is absolutely a public safety issue now." Toronto Police are urging dispensaries to come forward and report the robberies if and when they happen.

Trudeau's promise to legalize pot was one of the centrepieces of his 2015 election campaign and the Liberals have slowly begun making progress. The Liberals task force into marijuana released their legalization recommendations in December, which include  a minimum purchase age of 18, taxes linked to THC content and legalizing home grown weed.

While the Liberals were originally targeting spring 2017 as a legalization date, it seems more realistic to circle the end of the year or early 2018 as the time for the move to become law.

Follow Ankanaa on Twitter.

A team of international public health experts has issued a dire warning to the world. That is, we've learned little from recent Ebola and Zika virus outbreaks, and we're "grossly underprepared" for whatever the next terrifying epidemic might be. Publishing their findings in BHM Journal, a research team led by Dr Suerie Moon from the Harvard Department of Global Health and Population identified a number of serious weaknesses within the strategies of governing bodies and health organisations tasked with preparing for epidemics.

One of the report's key messages is that this ill-preparedness is inexcusable given we have so much data on infectious diseases. In the wake of 2014's West Africa Ebola virus outbreak, international health experts were quick to piece together what went wrong, and why we weren't fast enough to curtail a disease that killed around 11,000. Given that the number of global disease outbreaks has increased in the past three decades, and that trend is set to continue, you'd have hoped that such findings would have provided a bit of a wake up call.

But as the study shows, the world has been slow to learn. Assessing seven high-profile reports written about the 2014 Ebola virus outbreak, it concludes that we've failed to use this information to our advantage. If a pandemic broke out tomorrow, we'd make the same Ebola mistakes again.

As the report states:

"Ebola, and more recently Zika and yellow fever, have shown that the global system for preventing, detecting, and responding to disease outbreaks is not yet reliable or robust. The seven reports on the Ebola crisis largely agreed on the fundamental reasons behind our collective failure and the priorities for change... But many problems remain, without dedicated political or financial resources....The world will not be ready for the next outbreak without deeper and more comprehensive change."

The study notes that many critical weaknesses have been given "inadequate political or financial resources," suggesting that the global community "needs to increase resources and implement monitoring and accountability mechanisms to ensure the world is better prepared for the next pandemic."

2014's Ebola outbreak wasn't even the world's first. This photograph shows scientists testing samples from animals collected in Zaire during the 1995 Ebola outbreak. Image via

Dr Grant Hill-Cawthorne, a senior lecturer in communicable disease at the Sydney University School of Public Health, agrees. "Significant lessons were learnt from the Ebola virus outbreak in West Africa," he told VICE. "We realised that many countries are far from achieving the core capacities in public health detection and response. And it was re-emphasised that the World Health Organisation (WHO) is not set up for or funded to investigate and respond to outbreaks adequately."

In an ideal world, he explains, we need to be able to detect new infections that are occurring with higher frequency early on. "Ideally this would be occurring in both humans and animals, because if we wait for humans to be the sentinel animal of a new outbreak, it means the pathogen already exists widely in nature. And we need systems in place that put together laboratory and syndromic data, and can compare this to background levels to give us an early signal of an emerging new disease."

Once a new disease is recognised, Hill-Cawthorne says, we then need good methods of isolating and quarantining patients. "It's important to have clear trial protocols so that new therapies can very quickly be tried in the field," he explains.

Despite the study's dire findings, developed countries such as Australia have sophisticated notifiable disease systems that enable an early detection of viruses. So it's the underdeveloped world that will suffer.

"The likely hotspots [for outbreak] are Southeast Asia, South Asia, West Africa and South America—where the combination of potential vectors, mixing of humans, livestock and wildlife and less capacity for public health surveillance are likely to co-exist," Hill-Cawthorne says.

Follow Kat on Twitter

The first time I saw a neurologist for my migraines, she told me to stop taking birth control pills right away. Because I get sensory disturbances called auras with my migraines, she said, the pill—any pill—increases my stroke risk enough to be unsafe. Her advice meshed with the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which deem combined oral contraceptives—common birth control pills containing both progestin and estrogen—an "unacceptable health risk" for women who get migraines with aura. I took my doctor's advice and switched to an IUD, but that's when my migraine problems took a turn for the worse.

In addition to my typical aura migraines, which swarm my vision with pulsating zig-zag lines, I started getting migraines once a month that robbed me of my memory. Each time they hit, I was unable to remember what month or year it was, how old my kids were, what time I needed to meet my son's school bus—even how to use the remote control for the TV.

Alarmed, I dug into the research on migraines and discovered something surprising: According to a recent analysis published in the journal Headache, many of today's birth control pills are not only safe for women who get any kind of migraine, but they can also help prevent the most debilitating types—which would help explain why mine got worse when I went off the pill. According to this paper, the CDC's sweeping recommendations against the use of any combined oral contraceptive are based on a flawed, out-of-date interpretation of the science.

Read more on Tonic

Tensions were pretty much at a boiling point in DC last weekend during Donald Trump's presidential inauguration, and while we all saw alt-right figurehead Richard Spencer get decked in the face—over and over again—there was apparently another brawl involving senior White House advisor and "alternative facts" defender, Kellyanne Conway.

On Saturday after the inauguration, Fox Business News senior correspondent Charlie Gasparino wrote a Facebook post about the alleged scuffle, saying he witnessed Conway throw some "mean punches" after a brawl broke out between two men in tuxedos at Friday's Liberty Ball. He then reposted the account on Monday.

"Inside the ball we see a fight between two guys in tuxes and then suddenly out of nowhere came trump adviser Kellyanne Conway who began throwing some mean punches at one of the guys," Gasparino wrote. "Whole thing lasted a few mins no one was hurt except maybe the dude she smacked. Now I know why trump hired her. Btw I exaggerate none of this."

Page Six reported that the whole thing went down near the VIP section of the ball at the Washington Convention Center, and that the two men were reportedly members of Conway's entourage. One witness told the New York Daily News that Conway punched the man three times in the face, but, just like Jay Z and Solange in the elevator, no one is quite sure exactly what started the altercation.

This wasn't the only kerfuffle that Gasparino witnessed on inauguration night. He says that when he arrived at the ball with his friend and former sitcom star Scott Baio, they were approached by some "anarchist thugs" who shouted, "Hey Chachi, are you a fascist?" Chachi was the character Baio played on Happy Days, a show so old most "anarchist thugs" have no idea what it's about. When one of the guys made a move toward him, Gasparino reportedly shoved him away.

The star-studded guest list at the ball also included reality TV stars Caitlyn Jenner and Duane "Dog" Chapman, disgraced beauty queen Carrie Prejean, and boxing legend Floyd Mayweather. Mayweather has yet to comment on the quality of Conway's form or the force of her punches.