Why I Am Going To Hell

As usual, I just cannot let something go.

Two days ago I posted a cute little music video featuring a retar - I mean, mentally-handicapped girl - learning about having her period. The music video was culled from an instructional video made in the seventies.

Here is that instructional video in its entirety. You know you need to watch this:



Goddamn!!! They had some terrific drugs in the seventies!!! Everyone, say it with me: "Blood from inside my body comes outside my body through an opening between my legs."

Some people have expressed their revulsion over videos like this, and the fact that I share such things so eagerly, even viciously. "Why," they ask, knowing the answer before they speak the question, "do you have to put stuff like this in your blog when you know God will punish you?"

He won't punish me. He's obviously too busy punishing innocent children. With Down's Syndrome.

Truthfully, the funniest things are sometimes the least appropriate. We laugh at someone blowing snot out of their nose when they sneeze. We laugh when an old guy farts in a supermarket. And then shits his pants. We laugh when people fall down flights of stairs, or when a guy gets hit in the balls. These events all suck for the person to whom it is happening. But it is hilarious for us.

Occasionally, hilarity comes from the unfortunate circumstance of others. That cute little girl in the above video wants to know about periods, dammit, and due to her "condition," she will not stop talking about it to EVERYONE. The only way to shut her up is to pull your panties down several times and show her the bloody pad. And then have her do it, too. The funny comes from her retardation, coupled with the uncomfortable, mesmerizing shots of a grown woman ripping a bloody pad out of her panties. Sorry, but it's true.

However, is this exploitative? Did the director of this instructional video intend to exploit the condition of the little girl? I doubt it. But if he wasn't uncontrollably laughing offscreen, then he has no sense of humor. And if you're not laughing, then neither do you.

Cases do arise, however, when I think the line should be drawn. Take, for instance, this video here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yFc-U0Am_rU

This is Crispin Glover's "film" entitled "What is it?" It has no literal storyline, and consists primarily of retards in makeup having sex, killing snails, Shirley Temple in a Nazi uniform, and more retard sex.

Do I think that Glover crossed the line between funny and exploitative? Absolutely. He purposely cast his film with retards knowing that the curiosity factor alone would sell tickets. He knew that people would flock to see a snuff film filled with retards masturbating, naked women crawling on crippled men, snails burning alive, and more retards masturbating and/or having sex. Such forms of "entertainment" touch on our most disturbing tendencies to leer at the unfortunate. This film is nothing more than The Elephant Man roadshow, dressed up with modern advances in cinema.

Man, I cannot wait for the DVD!!