Quantcast
Channel: VICE CA
Viewing all 38002 articles
Browse latest View live

This Video of a Guy Riding on the Back of a Bus Will Melt Your Heart

0
0

Toronto transit officials are calling an incident of dude caught dangling off of a moving bus a “reckless, dangerous and a stupid stunt.” But others with a sense of humour are simply calling it as it is—the best thing to happen to Toronto in a long, long time.

A 35-second vid was pushed on Twitter just before midnight by a user that went by the name Gure Scarborough, that captured the whole thing.

“Only in Toronto!” the cameraman says as this pleasant, Canadian exchange goes from our man in the car to our nonconformist white dude with a spider-man compulsion.

The optics just feel wrong here and yet so right: The fact that he’s a white guy shouting out a Somali slang “Warya!” while asking said Somali dude if he understood. The idea that he’s fucking up the system by way of human-on-bus acrobatics. Then there’s the “yeah buddy!” which implies that he’s really into Ronnie Coleman. Other Twitter users found similar loves for the clip in question.

But sure, I guess you could say it was dangerous and that most probably shouldn't try this at home, as echoed by TTC spokesperson Brad Ross. “It’s reckless specifically because he is hanging onto an ad frame on the back of the bus. That’s just one screw or rivet away from popping out and him falling off the bus and potentially being run over by a car that may be behind that bus.”

But no one got hurt, folks, and if this little piece of Toronto can't bring a little smile to your face, Alberta would love to have you.

Follow Noel Ransome on Twitter.

Sign up for the VICE Canada Newsletter to get the best of VICE Canada delivered to your inbox daily.


Please Chill the Fuck Out About the Pee Tape

0
0

Once again America is living through one of those Trump-era Friday afternoons that feels sticky with anticipation of some major horrible news event blasting a hole in the weekend. In one corner, longtime Trump consigliere Michael Cohen is under criminal investigation over in an already complex case centering on whatever it is he does all day. In another corner, Republican National Committee fundraiser Elliott Broidy is resigning after it was revealed Cohen helped him pay $1.6 million to a Playboy playmate who said he got her pregnant. In yet another corner, former FBI Director James Comey's book about his tenure under Donald Trump isn't even out yet but has already enraged the president and inspired a media blitz from the GOP. In our fourth corner, Trump has for unclear reasons decided to pardon Scooter Libby, a former Dick Cheney aide caught up in a scandal more than a decade ago.

We're out of corners now, but in addition to all that, Russia is claiming a horrific chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag," Trump has ordered a task force to look into the Post Office's finances (possibly as part of his vendetta against Amazon), former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe (famously sacked by Attorney General Jeff Sessions last month) was raked over the coals by a just-released report, and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is said to be preparing to be fired by Trump, who seems increasingly inclined to order that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation be shut down. That move, more than any of the other developments, would likely trigger widespread protests, panic in Congress, and who knows what else.

Then there's the pee tape, the incredibly stupid internet obsession that refuses to die.

The "pee tape," for the uninitiated, refers to the allegation that Trump was filmed ordering prostitutes to pee on a hotel bed in Moscow. This was the juiciest part of the "Steele dossier," a 2016 collection of raw intelligence compiled former British government spy Christopher Steele, who at the time was being paid by an opposition research firm hired by Democrats. The dossier was published by BuzzFeed just after the election; subsequently, some parts have reportedly been corroborated by the FBI and others have been found to be false.

In the dossier, an unnamed "close associate of Trump who had organized and managed his recent trip to Moscow" reported that "Trump's (perverted) conduct in Moscow included hiring the presidential suite of the Ritz Carlton Hotel, where he knew President and Mrs. Obama (whom he hated) had stayed on one of their official trips to Russia, and defiling the bed where they had slept by employing a number of prostitutes to perform a 'golden showers' (urination) show in front of him. The hotel was known to be under FSB [Russian security services] control with microphones and concealed cameras in all the main rooms to record anything they wanted to." A female hotel staffer and another unnamed source backed up this account and said it had happened probably in 2013. (A fourth source, described as a former top Russian intelligence official, said that Trump's behavior had given the Russians unspecified "embarrassing material" they could use to blackmail him.)

When BuzzFeed released the dossier in January 2017, it sparked a lot of discussion, but nothing has stuck in the public imagination like the idea that the Russians have an incriminating golden showers video with which to blackmail Trump. And Comey has given everyone an excuse to talk about the pee tape again—in his book, he writes that the president asked him to prove disprove the allegation because Trump thought there might be a "one percent" chance his wife would think it was real. In an excerpt of an ABC interview that will air Sunday, Comey expanded on this account, telling George Stephanopoulos, "I honestly never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I don't know whether the current president of the United States was with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow in 2013."



This has various anti-Trump commentators, on Twitter especially but also in real publications, speculating that now, more than ever, the pee tape seems to be real. Sometimes it's obvious these people are joking, but sometimes it's clear that they're serious. To which I say: STOP IT.

It's not that I don't get that it's fun to joke about the president of the United States watching Russian sex workers pee on a hotel bed. It's not even that I think that it's 100 percent impossible to imagine such a thing—Trump entered what Bill Simmons dubbed the "Tyson Zone" long ago, meaning any story about him feels plausible.

But thinking something might be true (or even that it seems more likely than it did a year ago) is a long, long way from making it true. There's still no evidence that that bit of the Steele dossier has been verified by anyone, and even the Steele dossier's account relies on secondhand sources who didn't witness the alleged peeing themselves. Comey's account of Trump being worried Melania might believe it doesn't prove anything. I mean, surely Trump knows what his reputation is and how that might lead Melania to not automatically dismiss such rumor. After all, this is a guy whose fixer/lawyer—Cohen—had orchestrated at least two payouts to women who said they had affairs with him after his youngest son was born.

The broader, less funny allegation concerning the pee tape is that Russian intelligence has proof of Trump's shady doings they could hold over him. (This is something Steele himself was reportedly worried about.) But there's no hard evidence of even that being true. Though Trump has gone out of his way to praise Russian President Vladimir Putin over the years, that's part of his pattern of being friendly to strongmen in general. In fact, his administration has undertaken several anti-Russian moves. These include selling arms to Ukraine, imposing new sanctions on Russian individuals (albeit more slowly than some critics would have liked), and joining other Western countries in expelling Russian diplomats. Just this week, Trump called out Putin by name for the first time and rattled his Twitter saber in Russia's direction. And he recently appointed John Bolton, a noted Russia hawk (really, an all-purpose hawk), as national security advisor.

Setting aside the wisdom of any of those moves, does that sound like a president terrified of urine-soaked kompromat? Of course, you could argue these anti-Russia moves are just a way to shield Trump from the charge that he's being blackmailed, but at that point you might as well bust out the corkboard, notecards, and string.

There is no shortage of reasons to oppose Trump and no shortage of scandals to fixate on—in fact, this week it seems impossible to keep up with all the potential wrongdoing swirling around the man's disaster of an administration. So why keep yammering on about the pee tape? At best, it's an internet joke that has been thoroughly driven into the ground. At worst, it makes Trump opponents look a little unhinged, not entirely unlike Hillary Clinton haters insisting on rating about Uranium One.

Sign up for our newsletter
to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Harry Cheadle on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

No One Wants to Hire Trump Aides Trying to Escape the White House

0
0

Whether it's because the White House is a dysfunctional mess, Donald Trump's administration is waging war against the poor and the rule of law, or the president has a bad habit of saying terribly racist things about entire countries, for whatever reason, some of Trump's aides are looking to ditch their jobs.

The only problem? Now that they've worked in the White House, no one wants to hire them.

According to BuzzFeed News, current and former White House officials are having a tough time landing gigs in the private sector. One official told BuzzFeed that it looked like he'd locked down a new job, but he ultimately lost it—and was straight-up told folks at his prospective employer weren't down with the fact that he'd worked for Trump.

Recruiters looking to place Trump aides into new jobs told BuzzFeed companies have been wary of taking them on—given that the president's not the most popular guy around, firms don't want to risk the flak they might get for hiring someone from his administration. In one case, a PR firm told a White House official that they're refusing to hire anyone who's served under Trump because of the "reputational risk" that would come with the move.

"[Companies] are all worried about public backlash," a recruiter working with Trump officials told the outlet. "That's more real with these guys than I've seen with anyone else."

Even the big names among Trump’s former cronies seem to be having a hard time. Try as he might to make it as a talking head, no one really wants Sean Spicer on TV. Sure, the Mooch has the Scaramucci Post, but that pretty much failed, devolving into a platform where some dude named Lance just goes to town on Twitter. You could say Omarosa Manigault kind of achieved success after leaving the White House, but only at the cost of having to cry on reality television.

It's worth noting that a career outside the White House isn't the only thing Trump's screwing up for his aides—apparently, he's not working wonders for their love lives either.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.

Related: What It's Like to Be a White House Staffer Who Needs a Lawyer

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

This Nightmarish Burger Art Is a Perfect Metaphor for America

0
0

The world started to gnarl and unravel for artist Aaron Johnson when George W. Bush was president. The political and social chaos surrounding 9/11 and the War in Iraq inspired the Brooklyn-based artist to use his cartoonish paintings and sculptures to expose humanity at its most raw and depraved.

His bright hallucinations of sex, violence, and hamburgers melt into American iconography. Sharp-toothed monsters and mutated cowboys eat pancakes and human flesh. But beyond the grotesque spectacle, Johnson excavates an innate tenderness—it manifests as a warm embrace between monsters, or a panicked look in a man-eater’s eye.

After years of depicting this distorted reality in painstaking acrylic paintings, Johnson started experimenting with looser forms, like sculptures made out of old socks. The new textures offer him the freedom to dig deeper into his psyche, revealing subconscious patterns of intimacy and aggression. From now through May 5, Johnson has a solo show, Turkey Pistol Dinner, at Galerie Sebastien Adrien in Paris. And from June 7 till July 6, he'll have a solo show at Joshua Liner Gallery in NYC.

VICE caught up with Johnson to talk about Trump and sock hoarding, and to get a tour through his vibrant dystopia.

Trump Rally, 2017, 43 x 55 inches, acrylic on paper

VICE: There’s something really disturbing yet playful about your work. Is this tension something you want the viewer to feel?
Aaron Johnson: I've always been interested in the grotesque and how humor and horror can butt up against each other, how repulsion and beauty can work together, or eroticism and death. Like a monstrous couple sharing a tender moment. There has to be a balance.

You almost have to feel sympathetic toward the monsters. How would you describe them and the world they live in?
It's a painted world that mirrors this world, as filtered through me and the paint. This is a world that remembers we're animals, just bodies for a spiritual self to exist in for a while. We’re biological creatures that are eating and digesting things, and there are things out there that probably want to eat and digest us, so there are a lot of mouths in the paintings.

I don't totally understand the creatures or know how to describe them, so that's why I keep on making them. They can feel very real to me. The painting process manifests them. My role seems to be trying to open a portal for them to show up. You see cycles of life and death, sex and death, generation and destruction.

Cowboy Coffee, 60 x 72 inches, acrylic on polyester knit mesh, 2015

You also manage to comment on more surface level societal ills, like what’s going politically.
I think of my scenes and characters as not being specifically narrative, but more as ghosts, haunted spirits with a certain kind of American subconscious. That's something I’m thinking about now in the Trump era: What do you do when the world feels so vile and evil? I feel like we're still surrounded by so much love and light, and it's a matter of trying to find it. There's that kind of duality in these paintings.

Each year I make a few pieces in the "grotesque Americana" category. My paintings in 2008 were all painted on American flags. It was George W. Bush's last year in office, so I had been making a lot of work up to that year with cowboys, thinking about the toxic masculinity of the American male. There were bomber jets made out of dicks dropping burgers. I was thinking about the Iraq war, our response to 9/11, globalism, and the spread of American trash culture.

L: Hungry Burger, 2017, 5 x 6 x 5 inches, acrylic and socks. R: Cheeseburger Cowboy, 2017, 40 x 32 inches, acrylic on polyester knit mesh

Your visual language—cowboys, teeth, fast food—has remained fairly consistent.
My language speaks to the animalistic aspect of humanity. Our teeth can be pretty violent if you think about the things that we eat. Pizza and burgers can be a good representation of American crap culture, especially thinking about the brutality of slaughterhouses. Violence underlies so much of our contemporary world. It's all sort of tucked under this veil of consumerism. The burgers I make maybe don't look so benign, a little bit more expressive of the violence behind them.

Gone Fishin', 2017, 72 x 108 inches, acrylic and socks on canvas over panel

How do you think your practice developed after Trump was elected?
I needed some escapism, which spawned Gone Fishin’. I grew up in Minnesota, so the idea of going fishing is like checking out from reality. I thought it'd be interesting to take some innocuous topics—going fishing, driving a pickup truck down a country road, or hanging out in the hot tub—and make these relaxing escapist scenes monstrous and corrupt. The idea is that there is no such thing as escape.



That notion of "no escape" is also made clear by your eventual decision to make paintings about Trump.
Nobody really believed that Trump would win, but I had this feeling that if he did I could already see the horrible Trump monster paintings that I would make. I imagined this vortex of teeth in his face and his belly, poised to just inhale and devour the whole universe.

When he won, the idea of making that work felt so consuming. When I made Trump Rally, I found myself focusing a lot on the crowd which led me to paint all sorts of brutal shit— American flags and monster faces, an atom bomb blowing up a skull, Cheetos being vomited, a black guy getting beat up by a white guy. And Trump is just up there naked, and with the tiniest penis.

Hot Tubbin', 2017, 40 x 40 inches, acrylic and socks on canvas over panel

Do you think it's important to navigate the grotesque with a sense of humor?
Yeah, for sure. I like to make a really generous and rich viewing experience, paintings that give a lot to the viewer. Like with my sock paintings I want to evoke the feeling of absurdity, the unexpected quality and a sense of humor in making these forms out of socks.

I would start out by just dunking socks in glue and water and throwing them onto the canvas and pouring paint onto it. It just seems so stupid and amusing, socks as this irreverent material to put into the sacred area of painting.

Would you call these works paintings?
I feel like they’re within the realm of painting. But I like how—in terms of the context and history of painting—sticking a sock on a canvas can violate the purity of what painting is supposed to be. It’s also interesting how these socks can mimic a ready-made brushstroke. I played with the idea of the thick impasto brush stroke, so it's sort of like a joke about that as well as an homage to that.

Kind of like outsider art.
I think it's interesting that work considered traditionally "outsider" art is readily accepted on the "inside" now. I like that. What I don't like when work is so "insider" that it only makes sense to a really small audience. I like to make work that anyone who could appreciate a good film or novel or song can understand, without needing a background in art theory.

Solo show: Gone Fishin', Joshua Liner Gallery, NYC, April 2017

There’s so much going on in your sock portraits in terms of merging humor with horror and figurative with abstraction.
A good example of that dichotomy might be the man whose face is made up of sock guns and the woman made of tacos. It seemed funny to me that a face could be made out of tacos, and that those tacos could be made out of socks. A taco shell could be a flap of skin and the taco meat could be flesh or guts. I've always been amused by that Garbage Pail Kids kind of gross-out stuff.

With Son of a Gun, I liked the idea of taking the killing machine and deconstructing and reconstructing it out of something flaccid and impotent and harmless. I thought it was interesting to pair this juvenile content with a focused craft to get these glossy, almost beautiful paint finishes, and then to put them in a context where your first reaction is that they're far from beautiful.

Groucho Glasses, 2017, 6x8x6 inches, acrylic and socks

Where did you get all these socks?
Well I quickly realized that I needed a lot more than just my old socks, so I started posting on Facebook to have people send me their old socks. People didn't know what I was doing with them, so it was kind of a fun thing. When people would send me their socks I’d send back a little sharpie drawing.

That exchange and that process made the work less of a solitary endeavor. I liked that interactivity and collaboration. And I like to think that maybe the socks maintain little bits of the consciousness of the people who donated them. Then, these things become sort of like collective consciousness transmitters.

L: Cheesy and Saucy, 2017, acrylic and socks. R: Sweetheart Burger, 2017, 5x6x5 inches, acrylic and socks

You use a lot of different mediums and processes. Does each method correlate with a specific intention?
I’ve recently been exploring this blotting technique, which is just a matter of slopping paint onto the paper and then blotting it, doing that over and over again and looking for body parts and forms in the paint blots, then carving those out and allowing the narrative to unfold with the process.

There’s no real intention. In Pancake Rally, I didn’t plan to include Trump but he just showed up in the blotted forms. I was reluctant to make another Trump image but that resistance sort of made it that much stronger. Relinquishing control to a painterly mess allows subconscious or unexpected stuff to enter the narrative, and gives way to more abstract passages.

Max Ernst worked with a similar technique and used it to mine the subconscious. There's a lot of welcoming spontaneity into the works. I think each different process I've been involved in has an aspect of that. I think I'm finally OK with the idea that my practice can have all these different channels and that it can all be a part of one body of work.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Julia Gray on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

We Spoke to People Hooked on Nasal Spray

0
0

This article originally appeared on VICE Spain

A few years ago, Raquel*, 22, bought an over-the-counter nasal spray that contained the strong decongestant oxymetazoline – a stimulant she knew could potentially have an addictive effect. "I had a friend who had been taking it for years, to the point where he carried around a bottle of nasal spray everywhere he went," she tells me. "When I realised I was using it for much longer than prescribed, I went back to the pharmacy."

Raquel explained to the pharmacist that she used the spray every day before bed, because she feared she suddenly wouldn't be able to breathe in her sleep. On top of that, she used the inhaler several times a day, regardless of whether she had a blocked nose or not. "The pharmacist warned me to not suddenly give it up completely, but instead wean off slowly by combining it with a nasal spray with natural decongestants," Raquel explains. "The pharmacist also told me that my problem was rather common so I shouldn't worry too much about it."

All photos courtesy of the Facebook group Adictos al Respibien (oximetazolina)

"Nasal sprays work by stimulating the nervous system into forcing blood out of the nose tissue, which gets rid of the swelling that causes the blockage," Dr Marina Pacheco tells me. The instant relief that follows is what gets people hooked, as well as the fact that our bodies start relying on the spray to do what it should be doing naturally.

"The more tolerant of an artificial stimulant like oxymetazoline we get, the more of it we need to achieve the same effect. So when you stop, your natural defences are too low to keep your nose from getting blocked up all the time, and you want the relief of the spray back," Dr Pacheco adds.

I only have to casually mention that I'm working on an article on nasal spray for a colleague to confess that he has had issues quitting it, and so had his dad. They're not alone – the Spanish Facebook group "Adictos al Respibien" (Nasal spray addicts) is a support group of sorts, with over 500 members sharing their experiences inhaling oxymetazoline and offering each other advice on how to quit.

"I set the the page up nine years ago as a bit of a joke," says the group's founder, David*. "I wanted to know if I was the only person in the world who couldn't control their use of nasal spray. But to my surprise, in the days that followed, loads of people were joining to share their stories. There's still a jokey side to the page, but the group also helps people deal with the daily issues that their dependency on this legal drug can create."

All photos courtesy of the Facebook group Adictos al Respibien (oximetazolina)

For years, Lara*, a member of David's Facebook group, wouldn't leave her house without a bottle of nasal spray. "The bottle almost became an extension of my body," she remembers. "You know things are getting bad when you're going to the 24-hour pharmacy at 3AM to get a new one. Or when you're on holiday in a country like France and can't find your favourite spray there anywhere, so all you want to do is go home."

To hide her obsession from her local pharmacist, she would always go to different pharmacies across town to pick up the spray. She eventually beat her dependency, but she's still an active contributor to the nasal spray addicts' community – she comments regularly with the tips and tricks that helped her move on.

Álvaro*, 33, went through one bottle of oxymetazoline-based spray every three days for 13 years until he started weaning off it earlier this year. "My dad and I were using it all the time," he explains. "Nobody warned us that it could have such an addictive effect."

According to Álvaro, his withdrawal symptoms have mainly involved feelings of extreme anxiety. "My heartbeat would shoot up, I'd start feeling nervous and irritable, and would easily get into fights with my partner," he says. "It was just this constant problem."

Elena*, 44, is another active members of the group. She started using nasal spray two years ago, but has recently come off it entirely. "When I gave up smoking I felt anxious, but it was on a completely different level to the anxiety I felt coming off oxymetazoline," she confesses. "Every day without cigarettes felt like a positive achievement – a reason to be proud of myself. With this, though, I just couldn't wait for each day to be over. But the nights were even worse – I was constantly worried I would suddenly not be able to breathe."


WATCH: Xanxiety: The UK's Fake Xanax Epidemic


Christian has been taking oxymetazoline for 20 years – as a child he suffered from asthma and a range of allergies, but now he's dealing with chronic hay fever. "Because of the spray, I've become hypersensitive to smells, my eyes well up and I sneeze all the time. But I can't play sports without my spray, and even just walking around it can be difficult for me to breathe properly and comfortably."

Christian, Lara, Álvaro, Elena and David have all had different experiences trying to kick their habit. But when I ask them individually what advice they would give someone who's thinking about using a nasal spray with oxymetazoline for the first time, their answers are unanimous: "Don't."

*Last names have been removed to protect interviewees' identities

This article originally appeared on VICE ES.

This article originally appeared on VICE ES.

The History of the World Is Being Carved Into Stone by an Old Man in the Desert

0
0

Just across the California border from Yuma, Arizona, lies the town of Felicity, established in 1986 by now 89-year-old Jacques André-Istel. Pretty much the only reason you'd ever visit the town is to see another creation of his, the Museum of History in Granite.

The outdoor museum is made up of a series of 100 foot-long granite panels engraved with a history of civilization as a record for future generations, all sorted into categories like History of California and History of Humanity. According to Istel, they’re designed to last for 4,000 years and to serve as a record of our time for future beings, whether those beings are from earth or elsewhere. The idea is that if humans die, or abandon earth, the museum will still be here so that we won't be forgotten.

It invites you to imagine you are in a profoundly important place: In a pyramid at the southern end of the museum lies a marker denoting what Istel says is officially the Center of the World (the local county and France's Institut Geographique National back this claim).

Tourists take a selfie at the Center of the World marker

Istel himself has lived a varied and fantastical life, the details of which sound like something from Wes Anderson character notes. According to Istel, he—deep breath—fled France as a child to get away from the Nazis, hitchhiked across the US at 14, trained as an investment banker, quit investment banking to open the first commercial parachuting school in the US (thus popularizing non-military skydiving), married a Sports Illustrated journalist who was sent to report on him, owns a piece of the Eiffel Tower, and travelled around the world in a two-seat plane.

He seems obsessed with collecting achievements. When I spoke with him, he claimed that his town of Felicity is the spot of “the last incursion on United States territory by a European power,” and “the first town in America named for a Chinese lady.” (It's named after his wife.) The museum's website is peppered with quotes about Felicity from the LA Times, Time, and notable figures like a former French prime minister and a “consultant to the Library of Congress."

This is how he's described on the website of the Hall of Fame of Parachuting: "Jacques-Andre Istel - Chairman Created and edited the MUSEUM OF HISTORY IN GRANITE at Felicity as a legacy for Humanity. Served as Chairman of State Commission in Massachusetts. Introduced sport parachuting in the United States. U.S. Team Captain 1956 and World Record Holder 1961. Lifetime Honorary President of the IPC of the Federation Aeronautique Internationale, Co-Leader National Geographic Society Vilcabamba expedition 1964, Founder, Town of Felicity, Water Commissioner Imperial County, CA. Lt. Col. USMCR, Hon.Res.."

As for the history of the world Istel is inscribing in stone, it's all researched and written by the museum founder himself, with edits from his wife. Though the museum is not complete (Istel is currently working on an Animals of the World section), he estimates it would take around six hours to read it all.

So this is a brief history of the world—a sort of ultra-comprehensive version of “We Didn’t Start the Fire.” The subjects seem arbitrary, but when grouped together present what's actually a decent snapshot of life on Earth in the last 14 billion or so years. It runs from the Big Bang to Barack Obama, along the way touching on Gregorian chanting, Mickey Mouse, Buddhism, Confucius, Roe v. Wade, the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, gila monsters, Dolly Parton, the Panama Canal, moonshine, drones, Maya Angelou, the discovery of fire, Sesame Street, Vikings, Stonehenge, the Lindbergh baby, roller coasters, the Pyramids, game theory, the space race, Mesopotamian agriculture, etc., etc..

Most of the writing is pretty dry, but because Istel is writing with an intended audience thousands of years from now, the information is often presented in ways that are unexpected and occasionally beautiful. His description of cinema: “From the 1940’s on, some movies emphasized mayhem; some provoked thought; and some were works of art.” His note on women being allowed to serve in the military: “The ultimate equality, unfortunately, includes far too often the permanent equality of death.”

I didn’t get to speak to Istel in person when I visited the museum (he told me that, as a former Marine, he likes to look his best and my visit had coincided with a moment when he didn’t look his best), but I spoke with him by phone a couple of weeks later. Here's what we talked about:

Mr. Istel at the Museum of History in Granite. Photo courtesy of Jacques André-Istel

VICE: Would you mind if I record this call for the sake of my notes?
Jacques André-Istel: No, record it by all means, because I have a quote for you that I would like to make sure gets said entirely.

OK.
What I’d like to start with, if I may: I’ve read your incisive articles, and with great interest. I wish we had met. What threw me off is the word "VICE.” I thought you were a reporter from some pornographic magazine.

Unfortunately, I’m not a reporter from a pornographic magazine, just regular old news and culture.
One can always hope, of course. Did you receive the few pages I [emailed to] you last night?

I did, yes.
On page 17, did you read the comments of Elizabeth Starr McClintock?

"No digital images could have prepared me for the tranquil, lofty sensation of standing among the monuments…”?
Yes. I wanted to know how that compared with your impressions of what you saw.

Yeah, that definitely lines up with what I saw. From googling before I visited, I was not expecting what I was met with. It’s definitely something that is a lot more impressive to see in person than it is in photographs.
I can’t tell you the difference that the entire side of the monument, 30 panels, of animals of the world [will make]. It adds a whole dimension, you see. I’m just wondering... what was your general impression?

In what sense?
You know that the New York Times sent a reporter to do a half-assed story on Center of the World. You probably read it.

Why do you say it was half-assed?
They used the term “absurdist joke.”

To refer to the entire thing, or to refer to the Center of the World?
To the Center of the World. But they also didn’t bother to make any comments about the monuments or the quality of any of the texts. Now, you may quote me on this, and I will say it slowly, quote: The New York Times, that bible of self-satisfied privilege, failed to do their homework, and as many commented, completely missed the point about the Center of the World.

What point do you think they missed?
Well, they called it an absurdist joke! It’s anything but a joke. It’s using a central point for a valid approach to education on a very, very long-term basis. I particularly appreciate the A+ that I received from a famed historian after I sent a copy of the engraved texts and it could not be changed. It’s the only written A+ I ever got in my life and I get it after 65 years. The next one is due, you see, in another half-century or so. I hoped you liked [the museum].

I did, I really enjoyed it.
One of the things I’m always asked is: Why do this? Now, you realize that, as a parachutist, one enjoys challenge, and there’s a great similarity between the work I did in parachuting and this work. The act of parachuting is measured in seconds, with mistakes punishable by death, [which] sets a standard for education. Well, the stakes in granite are not punishable by death, but punishable by looking like a complete idiot for a couple thousand years. So, you see the challenge.

Engraving in granite involves a 14-step process, the way we do it. I’m not going to bore you with 14 steps, but among others, after selecting the topic, after using a CAD program to lay out the text and frames, after re-reading it, after checking it for grammar, after asking my wife, who started life as a researcher for Time, Inc. before she wrote columns for Sports Illustrated, she goes over every comma. We all do. So after all of that, we cut the rubber stencil. Then we take the rubber stencil and we read it over and over. Then I write my initials with "OK to paste," and it’s pasted up against the granite. And it can’t be cut until I put "OK to cut." So we read it again very carefully.

I gave an OK to cut on the panel about hippopotamuses. We had all checked it, the engraver, he checked. Happily, his brother was assisting him, and at the last second, before blasting the granite for millennia, we discovered that we had a hippopotamus 13.7 feet tall instead of 13.7 feet long! We came within seconds of my looking like a complete ass for the next millennia because the only thing people would remember about the museum would be a 13.7-foot-tall hippopotamus.

Have you noticed any typos or factual errors in the granite after you engraved something?
Well I’ll tell you, in the last 14 years, only one person found a misspelling. In an extremely common word. He found a mistake about nine years ago. I immediately went out there, read the word, and couldn’t see the mistake. And then, putting my finger letter by letter, I saw it. The point is, when you read a very common word, your mind skips. Did you find any?

There were a couple of capital letters that I wasn't sure about. I made note as I went through. I could email them.
Please do! I’d appreciate that... Did I read you the quote from Gibbons, modified by me?

I’m not sure.
I will now. Because people ask me why I did this. It’s not because of the legacy. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the name Jean d'Ormesson, a very famous author who died recently. Of the Academie Francaise—are you familiar with what I’m talking about?

I'm not.
Well, they call them the immortals. To be a member of the Academie Francaise in France is the ultimate, it’s sort of like a Nobel Prize. Well anyway, this fellow was interviewed at 90, and he was asked, of course, about death and whatnot. And he said, "Well I’ve read a great deal of Mother Teresa, and she struggled with doubts her whole life, so I’m curious about whether there will be nothing or whether there will be a god, and I hope there will be a god because it would be just awful to think of all the awful things happening on earth not being punished."

I’m not doing this for legacy, since I don’t know what will happen after I’m gone. But I’m doing it for the challenge, number one, and number two, you may quote me, this is inspired by Edward Gibbon, 1737-1794, of course you know who Edward Gibbon is.

I don’t know who Edward Gibbon is.
He’s a very important guy, he wrote the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, which is a classic text in literature and study of history. Now, quote, and this is my reason for what I do, with credit to Gibbon: Unprovided with original learning, unformed in the habits of thinking, unskilled in the arts of composition, I resolved to write history in granite.



And that’s based on a Gibbon quote?
Yes. I give him full credit, but I adapted it to my situation. Now, the interesting thing about this place is that we never advertise. Why? Well, first of all, this is a work in progress, and second, we have to get the point where we have significant worth, where we might eventually advertise. The town of Felicity has several sources of income, one of which is the farming that you saw. We have over 2,800 acres free and clear here, including quite a bit of farming, which is done by the world’s largest exporter of melons. And also there are few apartments for rent, and so, the operation of tourism here is something that will eventually become important. But at this stage, it’s just something that we hire a tour guide for four months a year and concentrate on writing panels in granite about animals. And also, we have to finish the history of humanity. Which is a fairly major chore.

Now, the interesting thing about this place is the education. Because this is another major motive—and I would like to put this down, quote: The purest form of education may be a self-directed search for knowledge. These summaries of vast subjects provoke and encourage such efforts. Now, for years, we were not taken seriously, and we didn’t particularly care one way or the other because we were busy, but for the last three years, the University of Northern Arizona has been using our panels for teaching, and that makes us extremely happy. Also, schools come down. Schools come from both Mexico and the US, and one school’s study program, so to speak, was that they put paper over particular panels, and with a pencil they get the words, and then they have to use that and write an essay on the subject.

That’s a great project.
Well, it’s the sort of thing that makes us happy.

Were there any sections that were a chore, that you felt had to be included but you had no interest in?
You’ve raised an interesting point. On the introduction [to the History of Animals panels,] I stated that they are divided into vertebrates and invertebrates. And then the next line says, “Surprise, the vertebrates, which are baboons, fishes, birds, reptiles, amphibians, represent only a very small part of the total, about 5 percent. The rest are invertebrates, which are mollusks, insects, and 6,000 species of worms." I was just thinking about how to do the invertebrates. You can only do so many panels on cockroaches and fleas and bed bugs. But anyway we found solutions, as we usually do.

You’ve mentioned earlier that you aren’t necessarily concerned with leaving a legacy with the museum, but what would you hope that your legacy is?
Now, I don’t think in terms of a legacy because once you’re gone, you’re gone, number one. And number two, as you can see, we have too many projects. I don’t feel 89 years old, but, you see, the challenge is counting the remaining panels of humanity that are to be written and the number of animal panels... How does one write these and how does one make the selections [on what to write] and whatnot?

Do you worry that the internet will replace people’s interest in seeing physical records of history like the museum?
Look, number one, there’s an old saying about "help me change the things I can and not worry about the things I can’t," and I’m misquoting but the point is, I think that anything written in granite will be there for a while.

Interview has been edited and condensed.

Follow Jamie Lee Curtis Taete on Instagram.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

How State Racism Helped Create a Knife Crime Epidemic

0
0

The British state's structural racism is causing an epidemic of knife crime, a leading anti-racism campaigner has told VICE.

Speaking on the British Dream, VICE's UK politics podcast, Stafford Scott – Race Advocacy Officer at the Monitoring Group charity – said, "There’s a preoccupation with labelling young black kids as gangsters. They’re taking liberties with our young people and tarring them all with the same brush, which creates an environment where they behave in the way that they do."



Scott slammed the police's denial that this constitutes a crisis. "We're a community in crisis. Over 50 young people have lost their lives on the streets of London in this year," he said.

He noted that the government's reaction after the 2011 riots, sparked by Mark Duggan’s death, still has an effect on today's situation. "They created the bogey man – the gangs," Scott explained. "They said the riots were the works of the gangs to deny any social or economic drivers that underlay the root causes."

The UK has seen a 20 percent annual rise in violent crime, while other types of crime decreased. Earlier this month six teenagers, including a 13-year-old boy, were wounded by knives in the space of just 90 minutes in the capital. Last week, Home Secretary Amber Rudd introduced a £40 million Serious Violence Strategy, vowing to do "whatever it takes" to stop violent crime.

But Scott doubts if more police officers carrying out stop-and-search will actually solve the problem. "I saw them searching older guys for possession," he said. "They are not there to catch the individuals that are carrying out the crimes and are a concern to our community. Our kids are bearing the brunt of institutional racism and ultimately paying with their lives."

Listen to the full interview on the British Dream.

You can keep up with The British Dream on iTunes, Acast or wherever you get your podcasts from.

@SimonChilds13

Words: Nana Baah

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.

I Tried Answering the Top Googled Question: ‘Why Are We Still Here?’

0
0

Welcome to our series, Let Me Google That For You, which sees us answer life's big questions. Or, more specifically, sees us answer the most googled questions in the English language.

On September 26, 1983, a Soviet lieutenant named Stanislav Petrov was monitoring Russian airspace for incoming ballistic missiles when a computer sounded an alarm. According to the radar, a single nuclear missile was headed towards the Soviet Union, and likely from the United States.

This was a particularly tense period during the Cold War and Petrov’s orders were to meet incoming missiles with immediate nuclear retaliation. But Petrov didn’t. He believed it was illogical for the US to launch an attack (and initiate World War Three) with just a single missile, so he overrode his orders, and waited to see if the bomb would arrive, which it didn’t.

Later, the incident was blamed on a faulty radar reading and Petrov was praised for averting a disaster. Today it’s recognised he likely saved humanity from nuclear apocalypse.

History is littered with moments like this, both within and outside of our control. Despite wars, plagues, meteorites, and our determination to poison the planet, we trudge on, somehow clinging to life. Which really raises the question: why are we still here?

To have some vaguely reasonable chance at answering such a thing, I reached out to three academics from three different backgrounds—a historian, scientist, and philosopher. They ran me though all the ways we've survived, and why.

History

Rolf Schmidt shows me some samples at Melbourne Museum

Dr. Rolf Schmidt is a paleontologist and expert in mass extinctions at Museums Victoria. And according to him the reason we’ve survived to 2018—and indeed the reason we’re here in the first place—is luck.

“There is the fact that we have this incredibly complex brain and have hands that are free, and that all helped. But a lot of our initial survival is just based on luck,” Rolf explained.

As he explained, history is rife with periods that our dispersed populations dwindled to genetic bottlenecks of less the 10,000 individuals, but we somehow fled or scraped by. And to illustrate the point he tells me about the Toba Eruption, about 75,000 years ago.

This super volcano blew up at Sumatra’s present-day Lake Toba, creating one of the largest eruptions the planet has seen. The explosion launched dust and debris 3,000 kilometres away, and dumped enough sulfur into the atmosphere to create a 10-year winter. Plants went extinct in the perpetual twilight and animals followed, starving off the majority of our ancestors. It’s thought that perhaps 10,000 humans survived, which apparently was enough.

Very cool

But as Rolf explained, our aptitude for problem solving played into our luck. “Not many species are flexible,” he said. “Even intelligent species like dogs or crows or octopi lack that versatility in their body and brain function.”

But he thinks one of our most important survival tools has been our proclivity for communication—which has allowed us to share knowledge and assimilate with other human species, such as Neanderthals. “This assured our success in migration,” he says. “And it helps to explain how it’s possible we live in these cities with a million-plus people as we do now.”

So it seems that sociability, adaptability, and pure luck have came together to allow humans to achieve dominance. But Rolf isn’t convinced we’re out of the woods. According to him, modern civilisation is a thin varnish, and it’ll wear off eventually. “This luxury of civilisation will eventually be gone and we’ll struggle,” he says. “But we’ll still be here. We’ll be sent back to the Stone Age for thousands of years most likely, but we’ll be here.”

Science

Bill in his office, framed by boxes

Next up, I met with Dr. William P. Hall, otherwise just known as “Bill.” He’s got a Ph.D. in Evolutionary Biology from Harvard and he’s currently working on a book exploring how, compared to other primates, our coevolution with technology benefits our future.

According to Bill, a reason we’ve survived comes from a mix of outliving the competition, but also looking after one other. “The humans surviving today are members of those groups that consistently were able to win competitions with other groups and of course, able to cooperate,” he says. “Natural selection at the genetic level is favoured towards the ability for individuals to cooperate socially and ‘altruistically’ within groups.”

Bill paints a picture of our ancestors hunting in the African savannah, where we started out somewhere in the middle of the food chain. But we didn’t simply evolve our way to the top. Instead, our tools got better at a faster rate than both our human and animal competitors, allowing us to multiply. Then it was other technologies, such as the wheel and boat, that allowed us to spread around the globe. And this protected us from annihilation, simply because there were too many of us in too many different places to wipe out.

“Tool-using with language and social inheritance was gradually learned enough to develop the technologies that were needed to dominate the entire surface of Planet Earth,” Bill explained. “Population and technology then began to grow in more-or-less exponential spurts, and especially since the Industrial Revolution.”

With our survival hinging on there being too many of us to kill, you’d assume that as long as we continued to reproduce, we’d continue to thrive. But according to Bill, this was only possible while the Earth’s ecosystems remained intact, which is no longer possible.

“I think we’ve become a cancer,” he says. “I have studied over three billion years of evolution and I don’t feel we have much of a future. The Earth cannot replace the limited resources as fast as we are consuming them, and the planet will not sustain us if we continue."

Philosophy

Matthew Bishop with books and an inevitable box of tissues

So Rolf and Bill had considered how humans have sustained their existence, but there was a question left unanswered. That is: why haven’t we looked into the abyss and decided to just quit?

Matthew Bishop is a counselor with a background in philosophy based in Melbourne. Every week, Matthew helps people to find meaning and direction in their lives, so it made sense to get his thoughts on why humanity has bothered.

According to Matthew, the trait that defines us as a species is consciousness. This has given us an understanding of our past and future, and most significantly allowed us to develop a concept we call “hope.”

“It’s this idea of hope, and hoping that we create much better lives for ourselves that’s very significant,” he says. “The idea that I’ll sacrifice aspects of myself now for my future self, and future generations, make hope a very powerful emotion.”

According to Matthew, hope doesn’t just feel good, but also drives us to choose behaviours that further our survival. "We have all these potentials—both positive and negative—for our society and ourselves, and hope acts as a pull towards these possibilities,” he says. “It’s hope that defines us because humans without hope lose drive, and we see that in existential dread or in mental illness.”

Although Matthew admits his depiction of hope is inherently optimistic, his attitude towards the future isn’t so bright.

“Our future is 50/50. Because as Freud pointed out, we do have a death drive; a drive for destruction, as well as a drive for self-preservation. I don’t think we’ll destroy ourselves, but I’m terrified we’ll destroy our society.”

So, why are we still here?

If there are two things I took from this, it’s that our brains and penchant for cohabitation have allowed us to prosper, even though these same factors now threaten our survival. But the other thing I walked away with was sadness. Because every one of those three academics thought we were facing a return to the stone age.

Follow Sam on Twitter

All photos by Jack Nelson

This article originally appeared on VICE AU.


Women Talk About the Worst Body Shaming They've Experienced

0
0

This article originally appeared on VICE Greece

Society isn't shy about setting unrealistic beauty standards – especially for women – and harshly judging those who stray too far from them. The pressure on many women to conform is constant, regardless of whether they'd be able to change anything about their appearance, even if they wanted to.

I spoke with five women about the ways in which they've been body-shamed – for having had a mastectomy, for a skin condition or for not losing weight. We talked about how it felt, how they dealt with the judgment in the moment and about the effect it's had on their lives.

Theo, 27

VICE: Hey Theo. What part of your body is under most scrutiny?
Theo: I get a lot of comments on the self-harm scars on my hands and shoulders. People think they're just an immature cry for attention, but I did it at a time when I was young and struggling emotionally. I didn't know a better way of communicating those struggles. I used to be ashamed of the marks, but after getting help from a therapist I realised they're just a part of who I am. I no longer feel the need to hide them from ignorant people – I would encourage anyone going through the same thing to seek help.

What sort of comments do you get?
People tell me how ugly the scars are and that I should hide them to avoid putting people off. Those sort of comments usually come from guys, while women want to know the details of what happened to me, which can be just as annoying. I now know to just ignore what people say, to the point where I actually feel sorry these people are filled with so much bitterness.

How have the scars affected your personal and professional relationships?
I'm lucky that I have the right people around me. My current partner and my exes have always been fine with them. My friends are supportive, and, in general, my family are great – although there are a few exceptions.

Sadly, it can be harder professionally. When I was working in a restaurant, I was told to always wear long-sleeved shirts so I didn't upset the customers, even when it was incredibly hot. I decided to go with it because I didn't want any confrontations at work. And, to be fair, the managers were strict about everything, especially tattoos, so I didn't feel like they were just picking on me.

Fotini, 29

VICE: Hi Fotini. What part of your body do people criticise most?
Fotini: My skin, which has been covered in psoriasis since I was 16. It's an autoimmune disease that can be triggered by stress and other psychological factors.

What sort of comments do you get?
The most annoying thing is that people think it's contagious. Then there are the looks of pity and disgust, which, after all these years, I've learned to tell apart. Finally, the comments – I've been told that I look like a reptile and that my skin is repulsive. The comments usually come from women – men often just stare disapprovingly.

How do you feel about your body now? Are you comfortable going to the beach, for example?
I'm comfortable enough with it. I haven't fully overcome all of my insecurities, but most days I feel fine about it. Therapy has helped a lot – it's pushed me to come to terms with accepting that this is my body and that I should own it. And even though it bothers other people, and even myself sometimes, I've grown to love it.

How has it affected your sexual relationships and friendships?
I know guys have rejected me in the past because of it, even though they haven't said so explicitly. But my friends and partners have been a great source of strength because I know they see me and not my condition. Because of them, I can now handle comments a lot better than I used to. In the past, the slightest remark was enough to upset me. But now I won't give someone else the right to decide what is normal and what is not, when it comes to me.

Despina, 33

VICE: What sort of things do people say when they discover you've had a mastectomy?
Despina: I've had people joke about how nice it must have been to have had a "free boob job". I've had colleagues literally telling me to put my "cancerous breast away" while I was trying to apply some post-radiotherapy treatment in the bathroom at work.

How do you deal with comments like that?
It was shocking at first, but over time you kind of get used to it. And how I see it now, nobody is immune from cancer – it could happen to anyone. I've learned to accept it and love my body.

How has it affected your personal and professional relationships?
One side-effect of the chemotherapy is that it's pretty much killed my libido. But on the positive side, I would be completely lost without the support of my partner, my family and my friends. I'm especially grateful for them because I know that so many people in my position don't have a strong support system.

Elina, 28

VICE: What part of your body is shamed most often?
Elina: I've been struggling with my weight over the past few years, and I usually get specific comments about the size of my thighs and bum.

What sort of comments do you get?
It's not just the comments, but the looks. Basically the first thing my parents do when they see me is weigh me with their eyes. That normally leads to a fight with them about how much they think I've gained or lost. I've also had colleagues tell me that I should lose weight if I want to get promoted, while some of my friends insist on reminding me that I won't be able to find a boyfriend until I get thinner. Generally, men tend to focus on making fun of my thighs and bum, while women try to convince me that I'll be a happier person if I just lost some weight.

The comments and looks obviously make me feel even more insecure about my body, and I've developed a sort of complex about the whole thing. But I have no problem confronting people if I need to. Once I was eating when a colleague came over and said that I should share some of it with him for my own good. I made it clear that what he said was inappropriate and he backed off.

How has it affected your personal relationships?
I've started to consciously hang around people who make me feel comfortable and won't judge my appearance. That includes sexual partners who don't shame me into losing weight, but show me how much they love my body. But of course I still feel insecure sometimes. For example, if I go to the beach with a group of people I don't really know, I'll wear something that completely covers my body.

Eliza, 30

VICE: What part of your body gets shamed the most?
Eliza: I would say my body hair. I used to think it was strange for women to have hair on their legs and their armpits, but I decided to try it out after a friend told me that it was much more comfortable. But it can be exhausting, too. As a woman, it feels there's always someone out there trying to shame you for what you decide to do with your body.

What sort of comments do you get?
While I was staying with a friend in Athens during the summer, he asked me to keep my legs away from his because they grossed him out. I immediately pointed out the irony of his legs being hairier than mine. But he kept on with it, complaining that mine were an "abomination". After that happened, one of my mates later shaved "FUCK OFF" into her own leg hair to make me feel better. That was sweet.

I also always have to deal with snide comments when I go to the beach. Whether I choose to cover up or not depends on my psychological state at the time. I find it quite hard here in Greece compared to a place like London, where I lived for many years. Here, it's considered completely normal to stare and make comments about a woman's appearance if she deviates in any way from the norm.

How do you feel about your body now?
It's my body, and I don't mind if what I decide to do with it is strange to other people.

This article originally appeared on VICE GR.

Calculating Exactly Why That Photo of Antoni From 'Queer Eye' Is So Fit

0
0

Well fucking hell. It's happened. It has only gone and happened. The Fittest Photo Ever has been taken. We can all stop trying. Instagram could literally cease to exist – it could fully disappear in a cloud of Flat Tummy Tea #sponcon farts, right now – and it wouldn’t matter anymore, for humanity’s pursuit of fitness is complete. Un-pout thine face, disassemble thine ill-advisedly purchased, selfie-optimising ring light, and gaze upon your victor:

When I saw this photograph of Antoni Porowski, the "food expert" (translation: "man who can make grilled cheese and Just So Happens to be genital-flutteringly, hand-carved-by-the-gods attractive????") from Netflix's beautiful and gorgeous Queer Eye reboot, I immediately sent it to multiple friends in what was possibly the fastest use of the Instagram "Share Post" feature in history. I had to unload the burden of what I had seen.

As a keen scholar of hotties, I was curious as to what exactly provoked my visceral reaction to this One Thirst Trap to Rule Them All (and, in fact, also the reaction of 208,240 others at the time of writing). I would like to share with you now the results of my investigation.

Throughout my process, I discovered that this photo is so special because it achieves something that science previously thought to be impossible. It brings together two elements that we usually think of as totally disparate when assessing a person’s eligibility for fancying, and in doing so, it also brings humans together. This photo – nay, this sponsored post featuring Antoni Porowski standing in a tastefully furnished room in his lovely new knickers – some way, somehow, is: both cute and hot.

There have, of course, been other examples of this rare combination, other blazers of this rocky trail. Recently: Manny Jacinto’s GQ photoshoot, or – if vintage is your thing – The Photo of yung Bruce Springsteen (there are others, of course, and they are unique to each of us: those are just a couple of favourites of mine from the figurative filing cabinet labelled :'), which is kept somewhere in the back of my brain). Antoni, however, has created what is potentially the most aggressive strain of what I will term "cutehot" in recorded history.

Appreciating the complexity of this photo is a complex journey. It is like tasting a fine wine: there are top notes and subtle undertones. Let me, an expert, take you through it.

Initially, of course, when you look at it, your eye is drawn to Antoni's glistening torso – his six-pack made of marble, his pecs of solid gold and just fucking loads of protein powder – and you think you understand. You think, 'Ah, here is a hot photo. I am familiar with these. I too have seen the Naomi Campbell and Skepta pics. I get it. I know hotness.' But then – because you’re definitely still looking at it, aren’t you? – your eye travels. It moves up. And there it is: Antoni’s face. A face that, yes, obviously looks like it was sculpted by Michelangelo himself, but which can, absolutely and inarguably, also only ever be described as cute.

There’s something of the puppy in that face: the almost melancholy expression, the perfect head tilt that gives the whole pose an aura of shyness, even though you know he’s standing there in his kecks. It says, "Hey." It says, "I know you’ve had a long day, so I made you this grapefruit and avocado salad." And, as if he were a kitten who has brought a dead frog into the house as a show of love and appreciation for you, all you can feel is a rush of joy, and a little protectiveness. By some alchemy, Antoni’s face – almost in spite of his outrageous conventional hotness – makes me (and, I would wager, those 208,240 others) want to wrap him in a blanket and feed him soup with a teaspoon. Truly, this is rare magic.

What I am trying to say is that, really, this photo is the great leveller: it is so objectively and exquisitely fit that it brings us all together. Regardless of our differences, we can gather round this photo of this man in some frankly very soft and high-quality looking boxers, and we can link arms, and smile to each other, and we can simply say: "Yes. Absolutely yes."

@hiyalauren

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Inside the Mystery of Animal 'Suicide'

0
0

The first I heard about animals suiciding was after getting up close with tarsiers, a type of primate found in the Philippines. These teeny-tiny Yoda lookalikes are nocturnal and loathe noise and human contact; the misery of being stuck in a never-ending line of selfie opps—such as the one I joined at a so-called tarsier “sanctuary”—can cause them to bang their tiny heads against the cage until they die. Of course, I only discovered this after I left. And I felt awful.

Tarsiers aren’t the only species prone to suicide. Records of animals taking their own lives date back to ancient times, with Aristotle writing about a case of a stallion who threw itself into an abyss after it realised it had unknowingly mated with its mother. Animal experts and media have been similarly intrigued ever since: scientists still don’t know what motivates groups of healthy whales to beach themselves, and lemmings have earned themselves a place in popular culture by throwing themselves off cliffs en masse.

Modern-day fascination with the topic appears to have started in Victorian England. A London news article in 1845 reported on a dog who appeared to be trying to drown itself. After being repeatedly rescued, "it again rushed in, and at last determinedly held its head under water until life was extinct." A growing number of reports then circulated during the 1870s and 1880s: a duck that drowned itself; a cat that hanged itself from a branch following the death of her kittens. Timing-wise, the examples seemed to bounce off the emerging idea that animals also had inner lives, and should therefore be spared pain and suffering.

There have been more recent cases of animals supposedly killing themselves, especially after experiencing unspeakable cruelty at the hands of humans. In China in 2011, a captive bear was reported to have smothered her cub and then killed herself after the cub was subjected to the extremely painful insertion of a catheter into its abdomen to extract bile. According to someone who claims to have witnessed the procedures on the grotesque “bile farm”, and was quoted in Reminbao.com:

"The mother bear broke out its cage when it heard its cub howl in fear before a worker punctured its stomach to milk the bile … Unable to free the cub from its restraints, the mother hugged the cub and eventually strangled it. It then dropped the cub and ran head-first into a wall, killing itself."

The use of the term suicide is “iffy” in a scientific framework because it requires us to prove an animal's conscious intention to die, says Barbara King, anthropologist and author of How Animals Grieve. “How can we reliably measure such a thing?” she asks.

Nonetheless, King points to dolphins as perhaps the strongest indication that suicide does happen in the animal kingdom. She says dolphins have been known to hold their breath until they die when faced with certain death from hunting, or when being cruelly confined. “Dolphins are conscious breathers and they are extremely intelligent, to the extent of being able to plan in complex ways, so perhaps suicide is within their realm of choice.”

Dr David Pena-Guzman from San Francisco State University has written extensively on the subject, and believes animals are capable of self-destructive behaviour. “There is also evidence that animals have rich emotional lives,” he says, “and experience negative emotions such as PTSD, depression, complicated grief and so on, which are commonly recognised as precursors to suicide.”

Some pets, argues Pena-Guzman, can actually die of grief when they lose their owner, just as we are gutted when they pass away. “Animals whose human companions die can be devastated by the loss,” he says. “In some cases, they sink into a depression so deep and so dark that they simply lose their will to live. They stop eating and die.”

A dog and a grave. Photo via Shutterstock

However, Antonio Preti, a psychiatrist at the University of Cagliari, thinks that this is humans projecting our specific type of grief onto animals. He told the BBC that these pet deaths can be explained instead as the disruption of a social tie: “The animal does not make a conscious decision to die; instead, the animal was so used to its master that it no longer accepts food from another individual.”

Some animal behaviours that appear to be suicide are something else entirely, other experts say. Take whales: they are social creatures, so when one member of the group gets sick and seeks safety in shallow water, the others follow suit. They don’t necessarily do it with the intention of ending their lives.

Nor do lemmings suicide—that’s an urban legend we can blame on Disney. Lemmings choose to migrate in big groups when the population gets too dense and they overgraze their immediate environs. They are seeking out new habitats and may accidentally die in the process, such as by falling down a steep slope or drowning in a river.

Another freakish example is spiders. Mother spiders will sometimes allow themselves to be eaten alive by their babies. It’s not suicide, as such, but a selfless way of giving their offspring their first nutritional meal, which helps to ensure their survival.

Although there isn’t consensus in the scientific world about whether animals are capable of dying by suicide, Pena-Guzman credits the study of animals as having taught us a lot about suicide in humans. “Most of our knowledge of human suicide, including knowledge of its causes, comes from inferences about human suicide from animal research,” he says.

“This makes sense only if there are strong parallels—biological, neurological, psychological, cognitive and social—between humans and animals relevant to suicide. These parallels further support the idea that animals have what it takes to suicide.”

This article originally appeared on VICE AU.

I Toured Vancouver In Search of Dispensaries That Give Away Weed on Your Birthday

0
0

Nothing screams “happy birthday” like a free stash of weed. So when I heard the rumour that several dispensaries on Vancouver’s Main Street have been known to dish out a complimentary dose of the good stuff on your special day, of course I had to put this to the test. So, my generous birthday present to my friend was dragging her along for a rainy Monday morning weed sleuth up and down the street to see what green bounty we could find.

With Vancouver’s weed policies changing in the summer I thought it quite good timing to have one final hurrah and make the most of Vancouver's lawless weed culture that surely, once legalized, won’t have any free birthday weed in sight. With the legalisation of cannabis approaching so too potentially ends the Vancouver dispensary as we know it—with shops having to seek new licenses and government-approved producers, as more and more regulations apply to the sale of cannabis in the city. So with the imminent end of the Vancouver kinda-legal-but-not-not-illegal weed party I wanted to get out there and make the most of the probably-flawed policies surrounding freebies.

Lotusland Cannabis Club

Not as depressed Shannon.

My friend Shannon and I met at Main street station on a depressing Monday morning and once anointed with her new birthday badge made from an old poster tube lid we hatched our plan to hit several dispensaries up Main Street all with the common goal: to score as much free weed as possible. Our first stop on our quest was E 16th Avenue to Lotusland, a fairly lowkey dispensary nestled between a Fido and a dental practise. I chose to let Shannon take this one on her own, so in she went and I was left curb side, side eyeing Shannon through the window so as not to draw attention to our scheme. Now there was something a little sketch about waiting on the street in the rain whilst my friend tried to score free weed inside but it still didn't feel anywhere near as uncomfortable as scoring drugs anywhere else in the world. If my memory serves correct the first time I picked up drugs in the UK I put on my seatbelt when I got in my dealers car and he asked me if I was “going somewhere.” The memory still makes me shrivel inwardly. So thank you Vancouver for making your weed culture so much less excruciating than buckling up in a jeep with the 18-year-old big dog of West London weed dealings.

Shannon was inside all of three minutes which was the time it took for the girl behind the desk to reach into the birthday joint jar and hand her a free joint. “Was she nice about it?” I asked Shannon when she came out brandishing her birthday doink. “She didn’t wish me a happy birthday, but maybe the birthday stash does that for her” she responded. I sensed Shannon was becoming a bit of a birthday diva—free weed and birthday wishes is maybe too many niceties even for Vancouver.

The verdict: It’s a yes, they even have a ‘birthday stash’ ready and waiting.

Grateful Med Cannabis Society

Across the street from Lotusland also on E 16th is Grateful Med. We knew it was a dispensary because in the window of the store was a 60+ year old lady rolling joints—I immediately felt a deep set respect for this woman; one, for being old and two for oozing these drug den-mother vibes like she could give us everything we wanted and more. She was like a happy weed yielding Cerberus guarding the gates of Hades and she welcomed us in with gusto. Inside was less like Hades; unless in Hades they offer free birthday joints on the regs.

“It’s my birthday!” Shannon said as she pointed at the poster lid pinned to her top that had “it’s my birthday” written on it in sharpie; I immediately regretted forcing this onto her. The guy behind the desk informed us sadly that they no longer offer birthday giveaways. “We stopped that at the end of February,” he said, “but happy birthday,” he added. It was my turn to point at the badge. “Sorry, you’re one month too late,” he said. I think the DIY birthday badge was making him sad and he gave us an awkward shrug. A last plea to the sweet grandmother of the ganja in the corner and we conceded defeat—rules are rules.

We paused outside the shop to take a sad photo and after about 30 seconds were followed out by the guy at the front desk who I assume now was working upon orders from the shop’s Mary J matriarch. “We feel bad” he said proffering a hand to Shannon holding out a joint “happy birthday—have a good one.” Our prayers were answered. Thank you Grateful Med for taking pity on Shannon’s birthday badge that I made that morning on the Skytrain and thank you to whoever’s grandmother it is that guards the gates of this lovely little dispensary.

The verdict: Yes, but only if you’re nice.

Eggs Canna

Opposite Grateful Med is Eggs Canna. The first three locations had been a 10 second walk from each other and it was proving to be a mighty convenient excursion. Eggs Canna has three locations throughout Vancouver and probably has the most structured giveaway policy. They weren’t surprised or offended when Shannon asked about the birthday freeby situation. They explained that with any purchase of $5 or over Shannon would get a free gram.

I appreciated the ease of this policy but couldn't help but miss the wholesome vibe of Grateful Med. Sadly there was no omniscient matriarchy in this place but it was bright and clean and smelled good—but if they don't have a grandma rolling the joints here will they be as delicious?

With a $5 purchase Shannon was given a whole free gram of Cherry Pie though and that’s a fairly sizeable giveaway. They didn't ask for her preference but I’m sure if we’d done a little schmooze we could have charmed our way to our crop of choice.

After leaving we checked the clock; we had been sleuthing for only seven minutes and already had quite the birthday bounty—I can’t see a better way to spend seven minutes of your birthday tbh.

The verdict: one gram of free birthday weed with any $5 purchase.

The Soap Dispensary

The verdict: Do not type “dispensary” into Google Maps—this place only sells soap.

We did try to get some freebies though. We were unsuccessful.

Green Cross Society of BC

After three successes we were becoming insatiable and, once our headaches from all the soap sniffing had subsided, the several block walk to Green Cross Society at E 26th Avenue had us confident that we would yield more treasures as our adventure continued. I guess our entitlement showed on our faces because it was an immediate no from the dude behind the counter; an exasperated one like he got that question all the time.

“We don’t do that anymore” he told us. I sensed there was a dark history here by his tone. “Did people take advantage?” I asked him. “People tried,” he replied. How mysterious. I continued to probe but he didn’t wish to divulge much else. The pain behind his eyes plus his curtness to discuss it any further told me their old weed giveaways may have ended in tears. What birthday tomfoolery had this poor dispensary worker witnessed?!

After our brief and cryptic conversation they offered Shannon a birthday discount on a purchase should she want one, but that wasn't on our radar at all. Paying for weed?! No thank you.

The verdict: No freebies but willing to negotiate a “hefty discount”—as long as you don’t bring up the past.

Leaves of Zazie

Shannon and Laura Bell.

This place has a whale on the window which I guess is fun but denied any flirtations towards free weed. They did wish Shannon a happy birthday though, as well as encouraging the rest of the customers in the shop to do so also—at least that’s something.

Unlike the other dispensaries Leaves of Zazie didn’t seem to have ever had a birthday policy—but maybe if enough people ask they’ll be forced to adopt one? Let’s hope so. This kind of positivity didn’t help Shannon and I though and we had to begrudgingly abandon the shop, none the richer. We took to the street for one final visit.

The verdict: No b-day weed in sight.

Gastown Medicinal

By this point the greed had set in and all we wanted was more. Shannon had a handful of treats now—and you know what they say; any more than a handful of free weed is just plain greedy—right? Wrong. Shannon was intent on making this birthday a two-fistfuls kinda birthday. So, on her insistence we decided to hit up one last dispensary in Gastown.

They were happy to give a birthday joint—of course they were. And they wanted to—who wouldn’t?! But they had run out. Tragic. After the initial crushing disappointment we had to remind ourselves that this morning Shannon had no free weed and an hour later she had lots of free weed—and if that isn't a good way to qualify a successful birthday morning I don’t know what is.

The verdict: Free b-day joints, as long as they don’t run out.

We wrapped things up after an hour walking in the rain with four out of six of the dispensaries willing to share their stash with the birthday girl. And after all that, Shannon refused to share. I think all the free birthday bartering got into her head a bit, she may even still be clutching at her pile of freebies Gollum-style in her house a week later.

What this little journey revealed to me was how lucky we are to have access to this laid-back cannabis culture across the entire city and how much we will potentially have to say goodbye to come the end of July. If the government takeover of weed distribution means the end of free b-day bud will Vancouver be a happier place post-legalization? Though I can’t say for sure, I do advise anyone with a birthday coming up to walk down Main street and take advantage while you still can.

Sign up for the VICE Canada Newsletter to get the best of VICE Canada delivered to your inbox daily.

Watch the Moment Han First Meets Chewie in the New 'Solo' Trailer

0
0

It looks like Han Solo didn't need any Shyriiwook Duolingo courses or whatever to learn how to decipher Chewbacca's roars—he's been fluent in Wookie bellows since the beginning, apparently. On Sunday, Disney released a new TV spot for Solo: A Star Wars Story, and, although the thing is mostly made up of clips from the first two trailers, the 45-second teaser does give us a brief look at one iconic scene we definitely haven't seen before: The moment Han Solo meets Chewie for the first time.

"So what's your name, anyway?" the young Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) asks, as he and Chewie stand on some cold and windy balcony. The Wookie lets out an introductory growl that presumably somehow translates to the word "Chewbacca."

Yes, it's a pretty brief scene. Yes, it's a little confusing why Wookies would have names they couldn't even pronounce themselves. And yes, it's unclear how Han immediately understands Shyriiwook, the Wookie's language, since most people in the Star Wars universe don't seem to be able to. Then again, everyone always understands a droid when it toots and whistles, so shouldn't it be the same kind of thing, or... never mind. All questions about plot holes aside, it's pretty great to finally get a taste of how Han and Chewie became "Han and Chewie."

Even if Solo turns out to be a complete mess, at least we'll have Donald Glover acting cool as fuck and a subplot about Han and Chewie's budding friendship. That weird-ass space train robbery looks pretty great, too, so that's something.

Check out the moment Han meets his future co-pilot and then watch Chewie roast him during a Sabacc game in the teaser above. Solo: A Star Wars Story is due out in theaters on May 25.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

This Ontario Ice Storm Even Kicked an Albertan's Ass

0
0

There are few things you get to brag about when you’re from Alberta—oil money, for sure, the Oilers in the 80s, and… and that’s pretty much it. Well, we can also brag about the fact we survive in a hellscape for six months a year, and brag about it we do.

If I’m going to be honest, because of my northern Albertan pedigree I’ve been pretty fucking cocky when it comes to cold weather in Toronto—I didn’t zip up my jacket for all of last year’s (pretty mild-ass) winter. I constantly make fun of co-workers, and when it’s super cold outside and my friends are shivering in the smoke pit I’m all like “this ain’t cold”—yeah... I’m that fucking guy.

However, that changed this weekend as Toronto became more ice than city. A massive ice storm rolled through this weekend bringing 100 km/h winds, taking down trees on to unsuspecting cars and leaving tens of thousand of people without power. With that wind came freezing rain that turned sidewalks and roads into either skating rinks or swimming pools. Over 1000 crashes were reported over the storm and 400 incoming and departing flights were canceled. The storm is still having lasting effects with many, many schools in the area being closed today.

I’ve made fun of people wearing massive coats when it first hit -5, and when a coworker wore their giant Sorel boots the first time there was half an inch of snow on the ground I smirked with the delight of the Grinch after a Who tragically dies in a house fire.

However, after experiencing this weekend, I’m here to say I’m sorry.

Before I get into my mea culpa though, I have to get something off my chest. There is something significantly different about the winters in places where Mother Nature is actively trying to kill you as opposed to where winter is an inconvenience. To know that if your car breaks down, or if you’re homeless, or if you for whatever reason you get trapped outside you could very easily die in short time, well, it brings people together. We, holding hands in the frozen tundra, look down at all the other cities that don’t experience the very specific hell of running outside in -35 C to start your car because it needs to run idly for 45 minutes if the 17 inches of ice that accumulated on there over night is going to melt and scoff.

Sign up for the VICE Canada Newsletter to get the best of VICE Canada delivered to your inbox daily.

Anyhoo, with all that said. Fuck this. Fuck this weather. Oh my god. Jesus fucking Christ. I hate this. I hate this so fucking much. Look at this bullshit!

It’s not even a nice deep freeze where, like, you get the blanket of snow and everything is just pristine but cold as fuck or a complete whiteout which has its own charm—it’s more like if Mother Nature was on an all-liquid diet for a little while and took a big, nasty slushy shit on Canada’s biggest city while also busting ass like a jet engine. And this ain't one of those normal shits, this is one of those shits where your legs go numb and you run out of things to read because you’ve been on the toilet for so long your circulation got cut off and your phone died.

I know that there is a whole tradition around people complaining about how much Canadian spring sucks (it always does) and then people complaining about the complainers—but still, fuck it. It is April, we’re not supposed to be completely covered in ice and have buses sliding down hills like Bambi taking her first steps. All this is to say: this weekend fucking sucked and while I still don’t respect Toronto, I do get their complaints about ice storms now.

I shouldn’t be too worried though, this is Toronto after all and if things get too bad they’ll just call in the military.

Follow Mack Lamoureux on Twitter.

Today I Learned: The UK Is the World's Biggest Importer of Legal Cocaine

0
0

As VICE revealed in March, cocaine hospitalisations in the UK have shot up by 90 percent since 2014. Why? Because coke is currently purer than it's been in decades and, throughout the country, is just as easy to order as pizza, because the war on drugs is lost and British drug policy is trash.

Campaigners argue that the first step towards minimising the harms caused by cocaine – both to humans and the Earth – is decriminalisation and regulation. Critics contend that this wouldn't work for a number of reasons, one of which being: how would you even start to go about building the infrastructure needed to produce and transport legal cocaine around the world?

The answer: it already exists, and the UK is its main beneficiary, importing more cocaine for medical use in 2016 than any other country in the world.

"In Victorian times, cocaine used to be available in the UK, via a range of patent medicines, as a topical anaesthesia and as an energy elixir – a sort of Victorian Red Bull," explains Steve Rolles, senior policy analyst at drugs think-tank Transform. "While the energy [elixirs] fell by the wayside with tighter controls on patent medicines and fears about addiction, cocaine has continued to be used as a local anaesthetic in some limited circumstances – mostly minor ENT surgery."

According to a report by the INCB (International Narcotics Control Board), in 2016 the UK imported 330kg of licit cocaine, accounting for 82.6 percent of all global imports. The UK was also the main exporting country, followed by the Netherlands, and the main consuming country, going through 90.5kg of legal coke – or 47.2 percent of all global stocks – in 2016.

These percentages are not small; so why is it that the UK is so keen on licit cocaine compared to every other country in the world?

"Other anaesthetics have largely replaced cocaine, but it's still there in the locked controlled-drug cabinet of most UK hospitals, along with all the other 'high abuse potential' drugs – heroin, ketamine, fentanyl, amphetamines and so on," adds Steve. "That the UK uses so much more than anywhere else I can only assume is a historical artefact of our long history of medical use."

So the NHS is three pints (of human blood) down and needs to call in some medical-grade gear (for an extremely complex throat surgery). Who do they turn to?

"The UK has never grown coca leaf, which contains the cocaine alkaloid, so all coca and cocaine products have only ever been imported, almost exclusively from the Andean region," explains Steve. "A set of international treaties oversee the production and transit between countries of such drugs – the key aim being to avoid them being diverted for non-medical use. UK cocaine starts its journey in Peru, the only country currently legally growing and exporting coca leaf for medical uses. This is shipped to the USA, by the DEA, where the cocaine is extracted – and then exported to the UK and elsewhere."

Wow, it's almost as if there's already an established global network that could easily facilitate the regulation of pretty much any drug, with no detrimental effects to anyone except the people who currently make money from it illegally.

Steve continues: "It's striking that this legal cocaine market is associated with none of the chaos, violence and criminality of the parallel illegal market for non-medical use. It's instructive when people ask how a legal cocaine market might work: we can just point to the existing legal market and say, 'Well, like that – just a bit bigger.'"

@tom_usher_

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.


This Footage of New York's Flooded Subways Is Absolutely Insane

0
0

If you thought the New York subway system's derailments, delays, and dead corpses made it a complete and utter hellscape before, think again. Things have somehow managed to get even worse!

After a tortuously nice weekend of 80-degree weather and some actual, desperately needed sunshine, a massive rainstorm swept into NYC on Monday, obliterating any modicum of happiness that may have attempted to set in. The storm dumped a torrent of water on the city, immediately unleashing a biblical-level flood on the underground subways. It was, to put it mildly, extremely fucked.

Behold!

Spring has sprung!

But lo, at least a few New Yorkers were strong enough to soldier on, stayed by neither rain nor gloom of morning or whatever.

Cynthia Nixon, for the love of God, save us from this rain-soaked subway nightmare. You've got your work cut out for you.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow VICE on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

James Comey: Sad!

0
0

No one who hitches their wagon to Donald Trump does so without getting a little mud on them, and often they suffer a lot worse than that. The president's aides have been so consistently revealed as fools, contradicted, fired, or indicted and even convicted that it's something like a law of nature: What goes up into the White House must come down.

Rex Tillerson was a respected businessman and leader of one of the world's most powerful corporations before agreeing to become Trump's secretary of State; he was fired in humiliating fashion after a tenure widely seen as a disaster. Once-successful establishment Republicans like Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer became mouthpieces for absurd propaganda before being pushed out of the administration. House Speaker Paul Ryan refused to denounce Trump in public as the vulgar reality TV host took over the GOP, and is quitting Congress without even getting to implement his long-desired gutting of welfare and healthcare programs. Michael Flynn attached himself as an adviser to Trump early in the campaign, got awarded with a plum gig as national security adviser, and subsequently resigned in disgrace, got convicted for lying to the FBI, and is now cooperating with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation.

Another player no longer in the White House who at least at one point was reportedly trying to cut a deal with Mueller is Steve Bannon, the strategist kicked to the curb by the president who once seemed like his kindred spirit. Even infamous Apprentice villain Omarosa Manigault somehow exited the administration looking less respectable than she did going in.

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall calls the victims of this pattern "dignity wraiths," because Trump reduces them to shadows of their former selves. As he wrote last May, "There’s something dark and sick at the center of the Trump World... Everybody who gets close gets damaged, usually badly. And the heart of that darkness is Trump himself, a lumbering vortex of need and rage, a black hole. The only question is why people keep going, mainly of their own free volition into his reach."

James Comey might be the most perplexing case of all.

On Sunday night, the country got treated to a much-hyped ABC interview with the former FBI director. He obviously didn't have a choice about getting sucked into Trump's orbit, like so many of the president's other underlings, but that just gives an unusual tinge of tragedy to the man's wraithing and makes him perhaps the definitive example of the phenomenon. According to Comey, Trump subjected him to awkward conversations and improper requests for personal loyalty before sacking him, kicking off a feud between the two men that has reignited with the impending release of Comey's book, A Higher Loyalty. Before ABC even aired George Stephanopoulos's highly-touted interview with Comey, Trump launched into a Twitter tirade, calling him an "untruthful slime ball," "a terrible Director of the FBI," and insisting his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email server was biased because "he wanted a job."

Comey's fall started with that Clinton investigation, which the FBI director appeared to end by holding a June 2016 press conference where he announced "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring charges against the putative Democratic nominee. Still, he took pains to criticize her team for being "extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." Commenting so publicly on a case, even one with huge political implications, was a major break from normal FBI procedure, and Comey caught flack from multiple sides. Republicans denounced him for being soft on Clinton; others questioned his choice to attack a candidate he said had committed no crime. (Comey told Stephanopoulos that he made his announcement because Attorney General Loretta Lynch was perceived as too close to the Clintons and "could not credibly announce this result.")

Months later, and just days away from the election, Comey released a letter saying that investigators were looking at new evidence in the Clinton email investigation. Though that evidence (a laptop owned by disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner that contained many Clinton emails) never led to charges against any Clinton aide, the letter was a major news story that might have cost Clinton the presidency—both before and after the election, Democrats were calling on Comey to resign.



In his book, Comey writes that his decisions during this period may have been unconsciously influenced by polls showing that Clinton would likely beat Trump. The White House claims that Comey was actually acting consciously and was trying to give himself "cover," presumably meaning he wanted to make sure he wasn't accused of hiding negative information by the right.

Even under normal circumstances, all this might have led to Comey's leaving his job early. But Trump, as he so often does, turned everything upside down. According to Comey, Trump asked him to drop an investigation into Flynn in February (Trump still denies this). Then, in May, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wrote a memo criticizing Comey for releasing "derogatory information" about Clinton—that is, being harder on her than regulations called for. That memo was used by Trump to justify Clinton's firing. But Trump subsequently claimed Comey “totally protected” Clinton and also said he fired Comey over the "Russia thing," turning the narrative nonsensical. Why was Comey let go? Which of Trump's several proffered motives was closest to the truth? We still don't really know.

Before 2016, Comey had a reputation as a nonpartisan, a man who, if he had a flaw, it was that he was a bit too self-righteous about that whole honor and duty thing. That reputation is done. Though he may have been motivated by a desire to pick the least bad, least politicized path in 2016, Trump's treatment of him clearly inspired him to push back, first in congressional testimony last year, now in the form of his book and attendant interviews.

The version of Comey talking to Stephanopoulos had abandoned the careful language of law enforcement for righteous anger. "A person who sees moral equivalence in Charlottesville, who talks about and treats women like they’re pieces of meat, who lies constantly about matters big and small and insists the American people believe it—that person’s not fit to be president of the United States, on moral grounds," Comey told Stephanopoulos. The former top law enforcement official also compared Trump to a "forest fire" and a mob boss, a toxic figure who "will stain everyone around him." Comey said Trump looked like he wore "tanning googles," and described meetings where the president would deliver BS-filled "monologues" that included transparently false claims about the size of his inauguration crowd.

Comey has not lost his credibility the way so many other of Trump's dignity wraiths have. He didn't bow and scrape before the president (at least in his own telling), and never publicly defended Trump. But it's hard to imagine Comey wanted to end up here—not just fired after making the most controversial call of his career, but turned into a political lightning rod. Trump's allies seem to want him prosecuted for a variety of crimes; the Resistance has put him on all kinds of T-shirts.

It's easy, especially in hindsight, to second-guess Comey's choices in 2016—if you were being uncharitable, you could even conclude that he helped Trump get elected and reaped that particular orange whirlwind. But under Trump, his options narrowed. Surely, he shouldn't have tried to suck up to Trump in an attempt to save his job. After he was fired, he naturally had to talk to Congress and tell them his side of the story. And when Trump badmouthed him as a liar, was Comey supposed to let him have the last word?

This is how things work in the age of Trump: Maybe you start out on the high road, rulebook in hand, confident of your path. But after a few turns that seem like the only way to go, you find yourself somehow down in the muck, and you're still not sure where you've gone wrong.

At one point in the interview, Comey told Stephanopoulos he'd still send the Clinton email letter if he knew Trump would win—that taking political considerations into account would have been a disaster. "Down that path lies the death of the FBI as an independent force in American life," he said. "If I ever start considering whose political fortunes will be affected by a decision, we're done. We're no longer that group in America that is apart from the partisans, and that can be trusted. We're just another player in the tribal battle."

That might be true. But it's also possible that the path we're on now leads to the same place.

Follow Harry Cheadle on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

The Weed Week Bracket: What's the Best Way to Get High?

0
0

With marijuana legalization looking more and more like an inevitability, the marijuana enthusiast faces a new problem: How should they get high?

In the old days, stoners didn't exactly lack for options—they could roll joints, turn apples into pipes, invest in a bong, bake brownies if they knew how—but today you can ingest your cannabis via gourmet meals, increasingly high-tech vapes, and bongs that double as art pieces.

Everyone has their favourite way to get high, but there's only one way to determine the best: A March Madness–style bracket featuring 32 different ways to get stoned. And you, dear readers, get to vote on each matchup to determine the winner. Just stayed tuned to the VICE Twitter account, where a series of polls will sort this out.

But before voting opens, let me give any n00bs reading this an overview of each method and its seeding in each of our four "regions":

PIPES REGION

1. Water Bong: The glass bong, the classic, you know what it is.

2. Glass Bowl: Another classic. It's literally the law to own at least one of these if you smoke weed.

3. Bubbler: A sort of crossover between a water bong and a bowl, for when you want to filter the smoke through water but don't want to go through the whole bong ordeal.

4. One Hitter: A small pipe, favoured by those who like to light up on the go and/or have a low weed tolerance.

Left: Water bongs via Wikimedia Commons | Right: Glass bowl via Eve Peyser

5. Wooden Pipe: Perfect for the stoner who doesn't want to get into a whole discussion about glassware.

6. Hookah: If you don't think a bong is elaborate enough, can I interest you in a hookah?

7. Gravity Bong: This is a cross between a science experiment and a way to get you really, really high. Here's a how-to video:

8. Gas Mask Bong: For only the most hardcore stoner, this bong allows you to do the impossible—look like a total nerd while smoking pot.

EDIBLE REGION

1. Brownies: A regular brownie with cannabis butter so you get high instead of just getting satiated.

2. Gummies: More complicated than your average make-it-at-home edible, but also more fun.

3. Chocolates: A fancy stoner's brownie.

4. Cookies: For when you're tired of brownies.

5. Firecrackers: A graham cracker with peanut butter, chocolate, and weeeeeeeed.

6. Tea: A good way to get stoned if you're a parent.

7. Crackers: Yes, this exists—you just have to go to Colorado to find it.

8. Mints: I guess this is for when you have bad breath and also want to get extremely high?

DIY REGION

1. Joint: The #1 classic—paper and weed baby!

2. Blunt: A cigar wrapper, oft flavoured, with pure, uncut 100 percent marijuana on the inside.

3. Spliff: A joint with tobacco mixed in with weed. For when you don't have much weed, your weed sucks, or you can't handle the strength of smoking pure weed.

4. Hotbox: All you need is a small enclosed space, like a car or a bathroom. A favorite of teenagers.

5. Cross Joint: Two joints joined together to create a cross. 420 X JESUS CHRIST is the hottest mashup of the 21st century.

6. Apple Bong: A bong made out of an apple.

7. Banana Bong: An apple bong, except you use a banana instead. Do I need to draw you a diagram?

8. Soda Can: Favoured by young marijuana enthusiasts, all you have to do is punch a small hole in an empty can and you have a pipe. The first time I smoked weed with friends, I did so from a soda can, and it sucked. Don't do it!

23RD-CENTURY SHIT REGION

1. Oil Vape: Usually in the form of a pen with a THC oil attachment, this method is favoured by classy stoners, and those who live in states with legal marijuana.

2. Flower Vape: Like an oil vape, except you put actual weed in there and it some how magically vaporizes into stoner goodness.

3. Dabbing: For experienced stoners only, this form of marijuana ingestion uses extremely pure THC shatter or wax, which you can buy at your local dispensary if you're blessed enough to live in states like Colorado, California, or Oregon. Otherwise, it's pretty easy to make your own. All you need is a bong for dabbing, parchment paper, and weed.

4. THC Oil: For anyone who doesn't like smoking and wants to forgo caloric edibles, you can ingest pure THC oil to get you high.

5. Volcano Vape: This pricey vape goes for almost $500, and compared to its smaller vape counterpart, the Volcano is a big boy. Basically, the vape fills a plastic bag with vapor, which you then suck into your lungs, and voila! You're stoned.

6. Weed Capsules: If all this is making you stressed, you can now consume weed simply by taking a pill.

7. Topical Ointment: Cannabis-infused lotion might not get you high, but it will help you with aches, pains, and soreness.

8. Suppositories: This is the one you stick up your butt or vagina. Don't pick this one.

Now that you have all the deets, it's time for you to cast your vote—keep an eye out on the VICE Twitter for the first round of polling.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Eve Peyser on Twitter and Instagram.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

This 1921 Proto-Meme Is Eerily Relevant Today

0
0

Can people change? While everything seems like a garbage fire right now, humanity has improved through the ages, right? An unearthed copy of the University of Iowa's satirical magazine The Judge from 1921 suggests that, at least when it comes to comedy, some things never change.

Behold what seems to be the first recorded use of the "What You Think You Look Like vs. What You Actually Look Like" meme. It also closely resembles the "Expectation vs Reality" meme that exploded after Marc Webb's 2009 film (500) Days of Summer used it to devastate Joseph Gordon-Levitt's misguided attempt to get back with his ex. The format has proliferated in the form of web comics, image macros, and YouTube videos and still sees healthy engagement on a dedicated subreddit.

The 97-year-old Judge comic shows that the meme may have really started well before the web. Some are even speculating that the comic may constitute the first meme as we now define them.

The style of the illustration is so similar to some anime-inspired memes and the bad comic style introduced by artists like Robert Crumb in the 1960s that it almost feels like a hoax. However, a PDF of the original Judge issue digitized by Google suggests this proto-meme is legit. The comic is surrounded by poetry and jokes that are also eerily relevant to the problems of modern life. Women are besieged by pickup artists in most of the jokes, and one quip proves that flat earthers were already on their bullshit long before B.o.B adopted the cause and "Mad" Mike Hughes rocketed into the atmosphere.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Bombard Beckett Mufson with vintage memes on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Here Are the Far-Right Conspiracists the Quebec City Mosque Shooter Followed

0
0

Evidence presented at the sentencing hearing for the man who killed six Muslim men in a mass shooting at a Quebec City mosque last year shows that he was obsessively reading news about Donald Trump and opinions from right-wing pundits and conspiracy theorists in the weeks leading up to the attack.

The Montreal Gazette reports that on Monday, at the trial for the 28-year-old Alexandre Bissonnette (who has plead guilty) a 45-page document was presented to the court. This document detailed the contents of the shooter’s laptop which was searched by the RCMP.

The document showed that in the weeks leading up to the attack Bissonnette was obsessively searching for Donald Trump news. From January 1 to January 29, 2017 when he committed the shooting, Bissonnette searched for the American president 819 times—417 times on Twitter, 337 times on Google, 63 times on YouTube, and two times on Facebook. Also on the laptop was a selfie of Bissonnette wearing a Make America Great Again hat.

In January of last year, Bissonnette walked into the Grand Mosque in Quebec City with a Glock handgun and calmly open fired, killing six Muslim men and injuring five more. Video of the shooting shows selfless and heroic actions being taken by the Muslim worshippers inside the mosque against Bissonnette.

Another portion of the document shows that Bissonnette routinely checked the Twitter accounts of right-wing pundits, conspiracy theorists, and alt-right trolls. These include (but are not limited to) Ben Shapiro (whom he checked the most), Paul Joseph Watson and Alex Jones of Infowars, white nationalist Richard Spencer, alt-right troll Baked Alaska, conspiracy theorist Mike Cernovich, former KKK leader David Duke, the far-right YouTube pundit and alleged cult leader Stefan Molyneux, Kellyanne Conway, Fox News personality Tucker Carlson and then-Rebel Media personality Gavin McInnes. (McInnes was a co-founder of VICE. He and the company severed ties in 2008.)

In addition to the repeated searches of Donald Trump and far-right social media personalities, Bissonnette searched for photos of the interior of the mosque he committed the shooting in. He also researched other men who committed mass murders including Marc Lépine, Dylann Roof, the Columbine shooters and Justin Bourque. Furthermore, he researched information about feminist and Muslim groups at Laval University, where he previously attended, and watched YouTube videos about the weapons he would use in the attack.

“The same themes come up repeatedly (in Bissonnette’s computer): firearms, mass shootings, the question of Islam and feminism, and the mosque [where the attack occurred],” the Gazette reports prosecutor Thomas Jacques told the court.

A unifying factor among the majority of these pundits, conspiracy theorists, and blowhards is relentless demonization of Islam and Muslim immigration. This isn’t the first time that Twitter accounts of far-right pundits have been presented as evidence in a murder trial featuring a white man killing Muslims this year. In the trial for Darren Osborne, the man who drove his van into a group of Muslim worshippers, killing one outside a London mosque, the Twitter accounts of Tommy Robinson, a Rebel Media personality at the time, and visited the Infowars website to read an article written by Paul Joseph Watson. The court also heard that Osborne received a direct message from a founder of the far-right group Britain First but the contents of the message are unknown.

Prosecutors argued that Osborne was “brainwashed” by far-right propaganda. The 48-year-old was found guilty of the murder of Makram Ali, 51, and sentenced to life in prison in January.

Last week, the court heard Bissonnette’s motive for the shooting was centred on immigration. In the police interrogation video, when asked why he killed the men, Bissonnette said it was because he wanted to “save people” from “terrorist attacks.” In particular, he focused on a tweet sent from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau the day before the attack, which implied Canada would be welcoming Muslim immigrants after Trump floated the idea of his Muslim ban. Trudeau's tweet caused a mass outbreak of hysteria and breathless coverage among the pundit class.

“I was listening to TV and I learned that the Canadian government was going to take more refugees, you know, who couldn’t go to the United States, and they were coming here," Bissonnette said, according to The Globe and Mail.

“I saw that and I like lost my mind. I don’t want us to become like Europe. I don’t want them to kill my parents, my family.”

Speaking to a social worker after the shooting Bissonnette said that he had dreamed of committing a mass shooting since he was a teenager and said he regretted “not killing more people” because they were in heaven while he was in hell.

If convicted, Bissonnette faces six consecutive 25-year sentences for a total of 150 years in prison.

Sign up for the VICE Canada Newsletter to get the best of VICE Canada delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Mack Lamoureux on Twitter.

Viewing all 38002 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images