Skip to content

Faux Outrage

Literally the most important blog in the universe since 2010.

Let the hypocrisy begin!

I have had many gripes.  This gripe in particular however is a tightly wound bundle of irony (which by the way, is not to be confused with a tightly wound bundle of string regardless of their similar worth).  I am not going to beat around the bush here: This is a rant about negativity.  By writing this article, I understand that anything I say can and will be used against me in a court of law.  In other words, please do not point out the overflowing buckets of irony; I am aware.

What bothers me is not the fact that people are opposed to certain things that they come across in their travels–we’re objective–we do that sort of thing.  My concern is that (and I am speaking very generally here) people are more willing to join a social/political/environmental group fighting against some cause or effect rather than for something positive.  Even those groups who have important messages that should be heard are, as they say, fighting for their cause.  You want an example?  You got it! Let’s take Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) for instance–a very reasonable cause.  The title of the group conjures a pessimistic image which I don’t necessarily believe to be incorrect, but seems to be a little extreme for my prude tastes.  Unless they’re going for the “angry mothers” motif, in which case, the group should be called Your Mother Against Drunk Driving.  That’ll do a pretty good job of striking fear into our entire population simultaneously.  Who wants to listen to their own angry mother?

So what about those groups that seem to have positive foundations?  Off the top of my head, I thought of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).  They sound friendly enough.  My initial goal was to use their ideals as a counter-example to the significant amount of negativity I’ve referred to previously.  Needless to say, it is not my counter-example.  I recently visited the PETA website ( and was drizzled…no wait…showered…no wait…flooded…no wait…submerged in water to the point where there would be no possible way of surviving, regardless of aquatic skill…with pessimism.

Exhibit A:

Holy.  Freakin’.  Crap.

Frankly, I’m speechless (besides the “Holy Freakin’ Crap” interlude, of course).  Such a friendly group with such a friendly premise.  Yeah…That and a big barrel of red-headed, machete-toting cartoon characters.  It’s all about negativity these days (note: hypocrisy).

“What about that friendly website called” I can hear you ask.  Again, seems pretty harmless.  Same result.

Exhibit B:

Most of the millions of cows, pigs, sheep, and goats slaughtered for their skin endure the horrors of factory farming—overcrowding, deprivation, unanesthetized castration, branding, tail-docking, and de-horning. At the end of their short, miserable lives, they are stunned, skinned, hung upside down, and bled to death.

There’s nothing like a paragraph that ends in “bled to death” to start your day of righteousness!  I’m all for not being cruel to animals, but this seems like a pretty offensive way to get a point across.  And don’t get me started on the liberal1 (note: wittiness) use of the word “unanesthetized” which, as the French say, “DOES NOT EXIST, MONSIEUR”.

I don’t have a witty conclusion to sum all of this business up.  We are consumed by and consume ourselves in negativity.  Perhaps this is the best way to get a point across or get a job done, but that idea seems particularly strange to me.  We’ve all said it jokingly and for the sake of irony, but for real this time: Screw Negativity.


1 The reason this is both witty and funny is the connection between the word “liberal”, which means both “generous in amount” and “one who favors greater freedom in political matters” (i.e. the owner of et al).

%d bloggers like this: