Thursday, May 31, 2018

New Jersey Cop Tells Woman 'You're About to Get Dropped' in New Body Cam Video

This article originally appeared on VICE Canada.

Newly released body cam footage shows a police officer warning a woman she was about to “get dropped” shortly before a cop punched her on a New Jersey beach.

The release of the Wildwood, New Jersey police footage comes after a witness’s video posted on Twitter showed the violent arrest of a 20-year-old woman on Memorial Day weekend, garnering millions of views.

In the new footage, you can hear one of the cops say, “Alright, you’re about to get dropped,” before physically going after the woman who was arrested.

The woman, Emily Weinman of Philadelphia, had repeatedly refused to give her last name to police prior to her arrest, according to the body cam footage. “OK, that’s it, I’m done with you,” one of the cops responds after giving her a final chance to provide her name.

The incident reportedly began when police saw Weinman with unopened alcohol. In the video, you can see a bottle and a can on their sides on a towel Weinman and another person are sitting on.

Weinman is facing multiple charges related to the incident, including aggravated assault of a police officer, resisting arrest, and being underage in possession of alcohol.

After being prompted by police, Weinman says she is calling her aunt, to whom she says the alcohol belongs. She said her aunt was on the way and told police to wait for her arrival.

Once she refuses to give her name to police when they give her a final chance, she begins walking toward the water and screaming at one of the cops, “Don’t fucking talk to me!”

The body cam footage, released Wednesday, can be viewed below. It begins with Weinman taking a breathalyzer test. “I know that didn’t come up positive, I didn’t take a drink of anything so,” she says when one of the cops asks her age.

In the body cam footage, Weinman says she is at the beach that day with her 18-month-old child. It’s not clear where the child is in the video.

During the arrest, Weinman thrashes around and struggles with police, screaming at them. She tells one of the cops he’s choking her in the body cam footage, though he denies it. In the original witness video on Twitter, one of the officers appears to put Weinman in a chokehold and punches her multiple times. Weinman appears to spit at one of the cops while she is on the sand being cuffed in the body cam footage.

The police involved in Weinman’s arrest are Thomas Cannon, John Hillman, and Robert Jordan, according to NJ.com.

Officers involved in the incident have been assigned to desk duty pending an investigation, CBS News reports.

City of Wildwood Police Chief Robert Regalbuto claimed that Weinman hit one of the officers in the torso, causing his bodycam to turn off as the incident escalated.

"From what I see on the video and only on the video, from not even talking to the officers, I think they did a decent job," Regalbuto said, NJ.com reports. "I think we could have done a better job at trying to explain to her, but it didn't appear Ms. Weinman wanted to hear what we had to say. She tried to tell us it was OK for her to possess alcohol, and that doesn't make any sense."

The county prosecutor office where the incident took place is still investigating.

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



from VICE https://ift.tt/2J7c1z7
via cheap web hosting

Judge Throws Out 'Sesame Street' Lawsuit Against 'Ejaculating Puppets' Movie

Sorry, Sesame Street, it looks like The Happytime Murders trailer is totally chill. On Wednesday, a judge threw out a lawsuit by Sesame Street claiming that the upcoming R-rated puppet movie featuring "ejaculating puppets" infringed on its trademark, the New York Daily News reports.

Last week, Sesame Street sued The Happytime Murders distributor STX Entertainment for using the tagline "No Sesame. All street," in its promotion for the Melissa McCarthy-helmed film, which is basically an explicit Who Framed Roger Rabbit? but with puppets instead of toons. The thing is directed by Brian Henson—director of Muppet Treasure Island and son of the late, great Jim Henson, the guy who created the Muppets and the characters in Sesame Street.

According to Sesame Street, the film's tagline could make people think that the Happytime puppets, which bleed stuffing and gratuitously jizz silly string in the trailer, are somehow related to Big Bird, Grover, and the rest of that wholesome gang.

"Defendants do not own, control or have any right to use the SESAME STREET mark," the lawsuit read. "Instead, they are distributing a trailer that deliberately confuses consumers into mistakenly believing that Sesame is associated with, has allowed, or has even endorsed or produced the movie and tarnishes Sesame’s brand."

Sesame's attorney Mary Mulligan even offered up some alternative taglines like "Puppets Get Freaky" and "Naughty Puppets"—but luckily, STX won't have to take her up on those exceedingly rough suggestions. New York City federal judge Vernon Broderick sided with STX and threw out the suit, calling the tagline a "humorous, pithy way" to distinguish itself as separate from Sesame Street, ruling that it does not impede on anyone's trademark, especially since it pretty clearly says, "No Sesame."

STX's lawyer, an actual puppet named Fred who has been giving his expert puppet opinion on the lawsuit since news first broke, released a statement following Broderick's decision. "We fluffing love Sesame Street," Fred said, according to New York Daily News, "and we’re obviously very pleased that the ruling reinforced what STX’s intention was from the very beginning—to honor the heritage of The Jim Henson Company’s previous award-winning creations while drawing a clear distinction between any Muppets or Sesame Street characters and the new world Brian Henson and team created."

The Happytime Murders is set to hit theaters on August 17. Until then, watch the insane red-band trailer above and try to remember that none of the characters have ever lived at 123 Sesame Street or shopped at Hooper's Store.

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

Follow VICE on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2Jgvu3x
via cheap web hosting

Welcome to 2018: President Donald Trump Just Met with Kim Kardashian

Hello, and welcome to the year 2018. A few things you should know off the bat: The Earth is dying because we made it so dirty, cars are driving themselves now, and pretty much everyone owns a tiny computer phone that knows everything and is also a television, which we keep in our pockets. And ah, yes—here is our president, former reality TV star Donald Trump, meeting with Kim Kardashian, current reality TV star, in the Oval Office of the White House.

As you are no doubt well aware, for a long time, most presidents had experience in either politics or the military (sometimes both). But those days are behind us. Instead of, say, working his way through the ranks of Congress, President Trump won the presidency by becoming extremely rich, starring in a TV show about how rich he was, then hitting the campaign trail, where he rose to prominence by saying terrible things about immigrants, women, the disabled—you name it. Now he's the leader of the free world.

Kim Kardashian is also famous for being extremely rich and starring in a show about her life alongside her family, some of whom have their own kids now and are equally famous. She's married to a famous man named Kanye West, who became very famous for making music everyone loves, but is now probably most famous for supporting our president who has said terrible things about immigrants, women, and the disabled.

Anyway, instead of sitting down with the president to discuss their shared history in reality TV, Kim Kardashian paid him a visit to talk about prison reform. You see, now our prison system is broken, and America is home to more than 20 percent of the world's prison population. Sometimes our criminal justice system punishes people like Alice Marie Johnson, a great-grandmother who has been jailed for 20 years on nonviolent drug charges, with a life sentence. Kim Kardashian saw a video about Johnson, possibly on the magic telephone in her pocket, and decided that wasn't fair. So she's asking the president—who is apparently friends with her very famous husband—to let Johnson out of prison.

No one knows for certain what the president might do, but he's already pardoned a former sheriff named Joe Arpaio—who ran a horrible jail, and was accused of racially profiling and illegally detaining Latinos—and Dinesh D'Souza, a pundit known for defending Hitler, who was convicted for violating campaign finance laws.

Well, that should pretty much bring you up to speed. Again, welcome. Famous TV people basically run our country now. Enjoy your time here until Earth becomes unlivable, and we all have to move to Mars. Or our president somehow gets us all blown up.

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

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2JfRo7f
via cheap web hosting

Six Reasons Why I Didn’t Say 'Stop' Even Though the Sex Was Bad

In my new novel, The Pisces, there is merman sex and human sex, good sex and bad sex. I like writing good sex because I turn myself on. If I’m not wet, it’s probably not a great sex scene. But I also enjoy writing bad sex, because it provides me with an opportunity to gain control of narratives over which I previously felt powerless.

In The Pisces, my protagonist Lucy engages in several seemingly-consensual sexual encounters that are disappointing, disgusting, sad. In each of these encounters, there is plenty of opportunity for her to say “stop” as soon as the situation becomes unpleasant. Yet she doesn’t say “stop,” and then wonders why.

“I thought about all this subterfuge, just to get out of a situation I had put myself in,” she says. “Technically I didn’t even need to do anything to get out of the situation except leave.”

Likewise, in my time of fucking, I have found myself in a number of seemingly-consensual (and at times seemingly-enthusiastically consensual if I faked my orgasm right) encounters just like this: with men, women, and non-binary partners. These were not situations in which there was any threat of violence. There was no clear power imbalance, and for many of them I was totally sober. Yet I still wasn’t able to, or was afraid to, access my voice. So why did I ignore myself? Why didn’t I say “stop” even though the sex was bad?

6. I didn’t want to hurt their feelings
I’ve been in a lot of situations where I was scared that if I spoke up, I would injure the ego of my partner. There was a virgin who used his cock like a battering ram. After we were finished, I made some suggestions as to how he could be gentler for his next partner, but not until my own pussy was thoroughly mangled. There was another nascent sex-haver, with whom I suddenly realized I was exhausted. I should have spoken up and said, “let’s postpone,” but I didn’t want her to think she was boring me. In retrospect, this would have been the kinder thing to do. When I fell asleep with her face in my pussy, she was upset.

My reticence to tell the truth may also reflect a deeper fear of being judged, disliked, or rejected for my needs. For me, it’s much more comfortable to shroud my own needs in the fear of not meeting someone else’s.

5. I thought there was something wrong with me
It’s always taken me a long fucking time to have an orgasm. I compared myself to the women I saw in porn who had an (often totally performative) orgasm in five minutes. Or I read erotica where a woman had an orgasm on page 5, and I was like, “Damn, I wouldn’t come until at least page 21.” When I got into bed with someone, I was already worrying about this.

Or maybe it didn’t take me an inordinate amount of time to come, I was just afraid that it did. Maybe it was more about the fact that deep down, I didn’t feel worthy of the sustained effort required of another person in order to give me pleasure. I, myself, have always been a “giver.” But I felt more comfortable with that role than with the possibility that I would be judged as “slow” or “weird” or even “greedy.” In order to relax enough to have an orgasm, I’ve always had to issue the disclaimer, “Hey, it’s going to take me a while. Let me know if you get tired.” Perhaps I should have just posted a little sign.

4. It seemed too complicated
Sometimes, the act of communicating one’s needs can be emotional. Even when I knew my partner very well, I found that dealing with myself was confusing or repellant. The sound of my own voice? Total turn-off. Also, sometimes I didn’t even know what exactly I needed. In those cases, it just felt easier to go along with a displeasing experience than try to find the words.

3. I didn’t think I mattered
I guess this one is probably the saddest. The tendency to prioritize another person’s experience over my own—my performance over my pleasure— may be a reflection of the way I was raised. It probably has something to do with being raised a woman. In these cases, I did a lot of dissociating. It was like, “Who cares? I’m the only one living in this body. And if I’m sort of OK with it, then I guess it’s OK.”

2. I wanted the fantasy
In the books, music, and films that informed my early conceptions of what desire should look like, there were plenty of external obstacles (think Baz Luhrman’s Romeo and Juliet) but seemingly no internal ones. The sex itself was seamless, easy—fueled only by longing, want, but not so much by lube. In my imaginary version of what sex would be like, I never fantasized about getting fingered so dryly that my right labia puffed up like a balloon. When this happened, I felt disillusioned by the discrepancy between my fantasy life and reality. I hoped that maybe if I just kept going, the reality would somehow rise, or morph, to meet my fantasies. Of course, the only thing that rose was a swollen vagina.

1. I didn’t know I was allowed to change my mind
One time, while still pining for my ex-girlfriend, I went home with another girl I’d had a crush on. I really thought I could handle it. But once we were in bed together, I felt melancholy, distant, and like I just needed to go home. Unfortunately, I didn’t know that I was allowed to have a change of heart. I didn’t know that it was reasonable to discover something about yourself while in the moment, which impedes the moment from happening. So instead I performed like I was having a good time. Then I slept over. Then I did this for four months. Had I spoken up that night I would have saved us both a lot of time.

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

Follow So Sad Today on Twitter and buy Melissa's new novel The Pisces here.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2LKJKjH
via cheap web hosting

Wednesday, May 30, 2018

GOP Congresswoman Says Grocery Store Porn Is 'Root Cause' of School Shootings

Republicans have long insisted that porn is destroying America, and GOP lawmakers have been quietly waging war on it in state legislatures for years—even if some of them seem to enjoy the stuff themselves. Now, a Tennessee congresswoman is taking the unfounded claim that porn is evil to new heights—arguing it's somehow a "root cause" of America's school shooting epidemic.

Diane Black, a Republican representative running for governor of Tennessee, made the comment at a listening session with a roomful of ministers last week, the Huffington Post reports. Discussing what she called the "root causes" of school shootings, she brushed off the fact that America is home to more than five times as many guns as any other country, instead pinning the blame on violent movies, the "deterioration of the family," and smut.

"It’s available on the shelf when you walk in the grocery store," Black said. "Yeah, you have to reach up to get it, but there's pornography there. All of this is available without parental guidance. And I think that is a big part of the root cause."

Black didn't elaborate on her theory, so it's unclear exactly how she draws a connection between watching people bang and perpetrating a mass killing. Nor did she answer the only slightly less perplexing question of what the hell kind of grocery store she goes to. Isn't grocery store porn just a weird subreddit, or is that really a thing? There's no way Publix has some kind of designated porno aisle. And how tall are these shelves?

The audio recording Huffpost obtained of Black's comments only lasts about two and a half minutes, so, unfortunately, it looks like those pressing questions might never be answered. But when asked if Black really meant that watching porn could lead to something like, say, the Parkland shooting, or the massacre at a high school in Texas earlier this month, her spokesman, Chris Hartline, doubled down.

"I think the context is pretty clear," he told CNN. "Diane believes the breakdown of families and communities plays a significant role in instances of school violence."

The idea that we could somehow address America's school shooting problem by cracking down on porn is, surely, a stretch. But it's not much worse than what Republicans and some school districts have come up with so far, like arming teachers with comically small baseball bats, or encouraging kids to fight their attackers with fire extinguishers and rocks. Or, you know, doing absolutely nothing.

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

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2spw7gU
via cheap web hosting

How to Change Your Mind with Psychedelics

Over the years, the same psychedelic drugs that inspired Timothy Leary's "turn on, tune in, drop out" movement are now being studied as potential mental health treatments for everything from PTSD to depression. In his new book, How to Change Your Mind, journalist and author Michael Pollan took a personal and even-handed approach to this latest resurgence, exploring the way various psychedelics can be possible tools for guiding people through anxiety, addiction, PTSD, and other matters of the mind and brain. In reporting on their possible health benefits, he also wove in his personal experiences with the drugs, and the testimonies of dozens of other people alongside the latest data and rhetoric.

On today's episode of the VICE Guide to Right Now Podcast, Pollan talks about the valuable role that psychedelic experiences can play in helping people transcend their usual habits and thought patterns.

You can catch The VICE Guide to Right Now Podcast on Acast, Google Play, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts. And sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2kCx95G
via cheap web hosting

Michelle Wolf Is Here to Replace Amy Schumer in the Hearts of Women

I was never a big fan of stand-up comedy. It's too crude and too male. In the past, it's always made me feel I wasn’t in on the joke. I mean, as a woman, I was usually the butt of the jokes.

When Amy Schumer rose to fame, suddenly my friends and I had a woman to laugh with about the uniquely-female aspects of life, like the strange male insistence that we "don't need makeup"—until we don't wear makeup and they tell us we need makeup.

For a few years, Inside Amy Schumer offered catharsis, and it kind of broke my heart to realize, scandal after scandal, that she wasn’t the feminist warrior I wanted her to be.

So when Michelle Wolf entered my consciousness, it restored my faith in funny feminism. Many had never heard of Wolf—myself included—before her incendiary, headline-making set at this year’s White House Correspondents' Dinner, in which she dared joke that Sarah Huckabee Sanders burns lies and uses the ash to create a perfect smoky eye.

A few weeks after, I watched Michelle Wolf: Nice Lady, her HBO comedy special, on a plane. She starts her set like this: “I should point out I am a feminist. Now, I’m not like a ‘buy my own drinks’ type of feminist. It’s like, ‘I want equal pay! And a chardonnay… Well then, just the chardonnay.'”

It’s depressing just how astute that joke is. I'm speaking from personal experience. But it's refreshing how in-your-face Wolf is with her views. (It's probably why the Trump administration has such an aversion to her.) Wolf’s set had me howling with laughter—or at least working really hard to stifle it so I didn’t annoy my seatmates. When my friends picked me up at the airport, I couldn’t stop talking about how they all needed to watch her set.

On Sunday, Netflix debuted The Break with Michelle Wolf, a 30-minute “late night”-style show that aims to be a reprieve from more topical series like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver or The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. I watched the pilot episode over the weekend, and it’s good—perhaps it will become great—but it’s definitely a new place for women to laugh at all the terrible shit we’re depressed about. (Like having to choose between kids and career or having a serial sexual predator in the White House, just to name a couple.)



The conceit of the show is that Wolf makes fun of whatever she wants—her opening monologue takes aim at Elon Musk, Geico, and the supermarket that refused to write “Cum,” as in “Summa Cum Laude,” on a graduation cake. But The Break’s bread and butter is still the absurdity of being female.

But since “no one wants to talk about feminism for more than any amount of time,” Wolf dubs one woman-centric segment “Sports Smash!” disguising it as a SportsCenter-esque homage to athletics, complete with exclamations like “Airball!” and “She shoots! She scores!”

It’s during “Sports Smash!” that Wolf once again takes aim at Sanders, dubbing her a hypocrite (“Slam dunk!”) and insisting she’s not making fun of the press secretary’s looks, just her ugly personality, which she dubs ”the Mario Batali of personalities.”

Which brings me to my hands-down favorite part of the pilot: “I gotta be honest. I love it when someone like Batali finally gets caught,” Wolf begins. “For justice reasons, but now we can also make fun of how he looks, because no one’s gonna come to his defense. Like, ‘Hey, that’s sexual predator shaming!’” Then she gleefully launches into it: “Mario Batali looks like what happened if the Macy’s Parade had a #MeToo float. He looks like what a tuba sounds like.” It is incredibly satisfying.

Wolf is savage when it comes to defending social justice, which is one of the things that distinguishes her from entertainers like Schumer, or Lena Dunham for that matter. They’ve each seemed troublingly oblivious when it comes to issues that don’t directly affect them.

Take Schumer’s string of controversies: In 2016, she came under fire for doing a lip-sync remake of Beyoncé’s “Formation.” Critics accused her of appropriating a Black Power anthem and turning it into parody.

More recently, Schumer’s trailer for I Feel Pretty sparked outrage for its backhanded take on body positivity. But while Schumer claimed her intentions were good and her work was taken out of context in these two examples, her failure to publicly condemn writer Kurt Metzger for trolling sexual assault survivors is more damning.

Dunham, for her part, has been wrapped up in so many controversies in the last decade they’re honestly hard to keep track of. When Girls debuted in 2012, the show was widely criticized for not including any actors of color. Just this fall, Dunham and Girls co-creator accused a woman of lying about rape. And she and Schumer stepped in it together in an embarrassingly tone deaf Lenny newsletter interview to promote the latter's book in 2016.

Wolf, on the other hand, is refreshingly frank in her criticism of power and defense of civil rights. Here’s how she tops off a joke about why NFL referees should become cops: “Think about it [...] they’re not threatened by black men, and their reaction to sudden movement is to just throw a flag! Or another solution is we could stop killing black people and address that we have centuries worth of ingrained racism in our society. But I’m just thinking out loud.”

The excitement I feel about Wolf and the criticism I'm leveling at celebrities like Schumer and Dunham isn't meant to pit women against one another. There are a lot of female comics out there doing the good work: look at Samantha Bee, for example. And Ali Wong, Tiffany Haddish, and Leslie Jones. Men too, like Seth Meyers and Stephen Colbert.

It remains to be seen whether The Break will become the next late night juggernaut. But we need more voices like Wolf to cut through the bullshit (and there's a lot of bullshit in these fraught times) and tell it like it is—but also make us laugh along the way. That's why she's my new favorite comedian—regardless of gender—and I'm excited to see what she does next.

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

Follow Kara Weisenstein on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2LKVSB6
via cheap web hosting

John Cameron Mitchell on His New Film 'How to Talk to Girls at Parties'

John Cameron Mitchell’s latest film, How to Talk to Girls at Parties, follows a teenaged suburbanite named Enn (Alex Sharp) and his friends as they explore the punk scene of 1970s London. One night, they stumble into a bizarre after-hours party filled with strange people—who are actually from another planet. Part sci-fi odyssey, part coming-of-age tale, the film chronicles Enn as he falls in love with an alien girl (Elle Fanning), and the two thrash through Britain’s gritty punk underbelly.

On this episode of VICE Talks Film, we talk with Mitchell about punk's history, what it was like to teach a young cast about the scene's roots, and how young love can feel foreign and otherworldly.

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



from VICE https://ift.tt/2sjZDFt
via cheap web hosting

Flight Attendants Tell Us About the World's Worst Passengers

This article originally appeared on VICE Germany.

Being on a plane can turn reasonable adults into the absolute worst people imaginable.

Many passengers, it turns out, believe that the price of a plane ticket also buys them the flight attendant on duty, and the right to be as abusive and demanding as they like. A study by the Association of Flight Attendants found that 68 percent of flight attendants have been sexually harassed during their careers. Only 7 percent have actually reported the abuse to their employers.

I spoke with Milla*, 30, and Elena*, 30, about the worst things they've experienced in their combined 12 years working as flight attendants. They shared their stories of endlessly creepy guys, and grown women screaming over plates of pasta.

Sexual Harassment

Milla: Just seeing a flight attendant seems to awaken people's sexual fantasies, and you can often tell who it'll be just by the way they stare while you're trying to give the safety demonstration. Once, this guy was sitting next to his girlfriend on a flight to Nice, and he was outright ogling me—it was disgusting. This other time, a passenger wrote on a sick bag, "I'd like to fuck someone who's working here," and passed it to me. It's so disrespectful—nobody would write that to their doctor.

Elena: It's usually old men in suits who hit on me. Sometimes they'll hand me their business card, and other times they'll shout something dirty at me. You just have to find a way of dealing with it while remaining professional and friendly. I don't tell them that it's inappropriate; I just accept their card and throw it in the garbage later.

Once, when I was working in first class, I was speaking with an elderly gentleman who I saw regularly on flights to Tehran. He told me about his children and how they were around my age, and that his daughter was studying medicine, like I am. He then offered to show me around Tehran. I like the city and Iranians, and my colleagues didn't want to go out, so I was happy to take him up on his offer.

After showing me around the city, he asked if I had a boyfriend and how old the men I usually date are. He added that, although he was much older, he was young at heart and rich, and it could be great for me to have someone in my life who could support me financially. He then suggested I give him a kiss. Luckily, he didn't persist when I declined his offer.

I've had a few men like that, who seem interested in my education and offer some form of support for my study. I'm usually quite naive when that happens because I like to assume that people's intentions are good. But it never turns out that way.


WATCH: The Craziest Hippie Festival in the Jungle


Poo and Vomit

Milla: A passenger once got so drunk that he threw up in his sick bag. I'll never understand why, but when we landed, he came up to me and held the bag in my face, before smacking the side of it as he said, "I puked." His vomit shot up from the top of the bag and splattered all over me. It was absolutely disgusting.

Elena: I've had a passenger shit himself mid-flight. The entire plane smelled so bad, all the other passengers were losing it.

Sex

Milla: I've had a completely drunk couple just sitting there looking perfectly normal, while the guy was fingering the woman under the blanket.

Elena: I once overheard this couple in their 50s having sex in business class on a red-eye. She was on top of him without a care in the world. When that happens, we usually give them a warning. If they don't stop, we might go and make an in-flight announcement.

Criminals

Milla: After catching a guy smoking in the bathroom, my colleague confiscated his passport and told him that he would get it back after we landed, and that his behavior was reported to the authorities. But after taking a closer look at his passport, she realized the person in the photo was about 20 years younger than the passenger. After we landed, my colleague called the police, who were able to determine that the passport was fake.

Drunk Passengers

Elena: I normally work in first class, which most of the time is quite nice because I only have to look after around eight guests. But sometimes we get these big shot executives who just sit there and down glass after glass of champagne before we've even taken off. From there, they'll drink an entire bottle of wine and end up so drunk they can't even get up from their seat without help. Some passengers—mostly businessmen in their 50s—get so drunk that they start smashing up the glasses.

Then there are sailors—they can be great to have around because they generally have solid medical training, which can be useful in an emergency. But we always have to keep an eye out to stop them from getting too wasted.

Milla: The problem is that people start drinking before they get on the flight, but don't factor in how the change in air pressure will affect them. It could be that you're just a bit tipsy on the ground but completely plastered in the air. We once had to do an emergency landing because of a ridiculously drunk guy. He was traveling with his mother and brother.

Verbal Abuse

Elena: One of our frequent flyers verbally abused me once. He first started mocking me as we were welcoming people onboard—something he found hilarious. I asked him to stop, but he wouldn't. He then asked to be seated somewhere else because he didn't want to sit next to his wife, but we couldn't, so that's when he called me dumb and told me, literally, that I had a "whore head." We had already taken off, so we obviously couldn't kick him off the flight. The only thing I could do was report him to the cockpit. In situations like these, a report is written and the passenger could be banned from flying with the airline.

On another flight, I had a woman scream at me because she was angry that all we had left to serve was pasta. She went completely off the rails, and another passenger had to intervene. I was so upset. I was fighting back tears and had to lock myself in the bathroom. You can get so angry at times in this job, especially when adults start yelling at you because they didn't get the meal they wanted. But you can't lose your composure in front of passengers. Being a flight attendant is a bit like being a bartender, but difficult customers don't just get up and leave—you have to deal with them for the next ten hours. So it's important that you find a way to resolve any conflicts as quickly as possible.

* Milla and Elena's names were changed to protect their identities.

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



from VICE https://ift.tt/2xrh4cp
via cheap web hosting

The Radical Economics of Lending Your Friends Money

A few underemployed twenty-something pals and I were recently chatting about how great it would be to start our own businesses. A craft beer and junk food shop, for instance, or a 24-hour deli with low lighting and records. Great ideas were floated, but everyone seemed to have the same problem: no startup funds. There’s no VC on a golden Silicon Valley throne willing to finance their ideas. No bank that would take their low credit scores seriously, no rich parent sitting at home ready to cut a check. And even if a bank would give them a loan, they’d probably be eaten alive by high interest—a problem many small business owners, especially people of color, face in this country.

I suggested that, because they’re young and can afford a risk, perhaps they should band together and start a kye.

The word kye (pronounced “geh”) drew a huh response from my friends, because it is indeed a foreign concept—one dating back to 16th-century Korean farming villages. Essentially, a kye is a lending circle based on mutual commitment. Imagine a group of neighbors and friends who gather once a month over a communal kettle of makgeolli, with each person throwing the same amount of money into a kitty. At each monthly meeting, one person would receive the month’s pot, allowing them to go off and start a (hopefully) flourishing business. The club would continue meeting monthly until every investor had her or his payout.

Peasants and merchants who couldn’t procure a loan from a yangban (a member of the Korean ruling class in the Joseon dynasty) were able to economically and socially empower one another only because they chose to unite. Here in America, we find ourselves atomized by our very own yangban, who rule powerful corporate entities and politics. With immigrants and black and Latinx applicants being frequently denied loans and millennials struggling to save, a kye could be the entrepreneurial leg up many Americans need.

The practice of lending circles isn't unique to Korea—Japan has the tanomoshi, China the hui, West Africa the sou-sou, and Latin America the tanda. Immigrants from various countries have brought their lending circles to America, each with unique traditions. In English, a kye is known as a rotating credit and savings association, or a ROSCA.

Most of the clubs don’t charge interest on loans, though the Chinese hui system does, at a rate decided by the club organizer. In the hui, each bidder for a particular month’s loan must submit a bid with an interest amount. The highest interest rate bidder usually wins the month’s pot, and the interest is evenly divided among the remaining group members. In other systems, the club organizer decides who gets the disbursement based on need, there is a consensus-like decision-making process, or the drawing is random.

Melany DeLa Cruz-Viesca, assistant director of the UCLA Asian American Studies Center, told me that financial and social shifts in the past decade could have created potential for kye-type schemes in America. “There was this whole shift that happened with the Great Recession, where the credit line started tightening up and millennials couldn’t get credit from bank or government programs, so they turned to foundations and venture capitalists,” DeLa Cruz-Viesca said. “The shared collective identity is more common amongst millennials—with living spaces, shared businesses, and shared economy—so I think [a lending circle] is possible if you do have the resources and the means.”



In the 80s and 90s, restaurants popped up like mushrooms in LA’s Koreatown because after long days at work, groups of Korean immigrants gathered over bubbling pots of kimchi jjigae and glasses of soju and whiskey to trust one another with what little money they had.

Over the years, bonds grew and strength beyond money emerged from such Koreatown kye communities. As someone who runs her family’s restaurant in Southern California, I know how isolating owning your own small business can be, as well as the mental health issues that often plague small business owners. Calculating taxes until 1 AM can be easier and less lonely when you're part of a lending circle because you have a rock-solid network to consult and commiserate with. While it’s easy to miss other social commitments, the strong financial bonds of a kye knit its members together, in the process creating a supportive social system.

“There’s a psychological aspect for it,” Jephthah Acheampong, head of marketing and sales for Esusu, a lending circle app based on the West African sou-sou, told me. “Whenever I get returns, and I chip in and someone else gets the return, I feel like I owe that person something. I automatically feel like I'm supposed to be there for the person, and it goes past the financials—it becomes a mutually beneficial relationship.”

“It surpasses the idea of getting immediate capital—instead, it focuses on bonding with other people in your group,” added Acheampong. In that spirit, he believes lending circles can empower larger communities, including those outside their groups. He cited Kenyan financial circles that he’d heard of that pool returns to build community wells as an example.

“So many cultures have been doing this for generations and it's such a beautiful way to build trust and community with others and create collective economic power,” said financial planner Pamela Capalad Kushner. “I don't think it's any coincidence that many immigrants and people of color have brought this tradition to the US, where we often face discrimination when it comes to financial and banking institutions.”

Danny Bin, vice president of private equity at asset management firm Neuberger Berman, is a hui success story. Twenty years ago, Bin and his father immigrated to the United States without savings or credit history to speak of, plus “mountains of debt,” said Bin. Living in a small studio in Flushing, Queens, they shared a bathroom and a kitchen with six other families. Bin’s father worked as a waiter in Chinese restaurants and the small family struggled to stay afloat. Then their relatives invited them to join a hui, from which Bin’s father started his first business; another hui provided a house downpayment. Bin’s father now owns three businesses and two houses.

“[My dad] achieved what he envisioned as the American dream, all thanks to hui,” Bin explained. Inspired by this, Bin left his job at Google and started Monk, an app based on the hui model. Though he ended up closing Monk, he believes the lending circle system can help millennials save and spend money responsibly, develop a system of social and financial accountability, and reduce reliance on banks. Most importantly, said Bin, “You can magnify the power of communities with the people you love and trust.”

But what happens when a lending circle goes bad? For some Korean immigrants in New Jersey and some Chinese immigrants in Flushing, it meant financial devastation and frayed relationships. Informal lending circles operate on trust, and the only incentive in many of the groups is social pressure and immigrant inter-reliance. “One of my biggest concerns is if someone receives the lump sum early on and just ghosts the entire group,” said Capalad Kushner, the financial planner. Because of an undocumented immigration status or distrust of American legal systems, some financial losses from corrupt lending circles are never recouped. A kye organizer could also abuse their power by playing favorites, delaying a disbursement to a member who badly needs funds.

Insurance, social connections, and security deposits have been suggested as methods for deterring lending circle defaults. “I do recommend that you create or join these apps with a group of friends and colleagues you know and trust, especially at first,” Capalad Kushner suggested.

If you want to go formal, there are lending service apps like eMoneyPool and eSusu, and companies like Mission Asset Fund. eMoneyPool offers tiered rates based on urgency of need and guaranteed payment protection. eSusu aims to empower black communities and may report non-payers to credit bureaus like any default. Mission Asset Fund seeks to help the most economically disempowered, monitoring its lending groups and vetting applications to help prevent non-payments. All three report members financial activities to credit bureaus in order to help build their credit.

Even with company-run formal lending circles, Capalad Kushner recommends going with your own network. “These (lending circle) apps do have mechanisms to vet strangers, but I would use them as the platform for organizing your own lending circles,” she said.

If you choose an informal lending circle, you can structure your group how you’d like. That could mean $500 a month with 20 members, or $2,000 a month with five members, or two linked groups of ten people each—it’s up to you. Withdrawals can be random or predetermined, based on a tiered level of contribution or need. Regardless, social meetings should be encouraged—a kye has to be taken seriously to function.

Immigrants from many countries have long used these clubs to survive discrimination by banks, in the process bringing fresh ideas and a wealth of diversity to American entrepreneurship. These ancient lending circles can breed communal empowerment—which is more important than ever in these Trumpian corporate times.

Capalad Kushner sees bonding together financially as our only option for successful resistance: “In today's era and political climate, as economic power is being taken away from low-income citizens and communities of color, finding ways to collaborate and come together financially is one of the main ways we can get through this administration with our resources intact.”

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

Follow Dakota Kim on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2LFIYnP
via cheap web hosting

Tuesday, May 29, 2018

Wales Is Leading the Way in LGBTQ-Inclusive Sex Education

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.

Thirty years ago, Section 28 was introduced into UK law, banning the "promotion of homosexuality" in schools. This month, on May 22, Welsh Education Minister Kirsty Williams introduced new legislation making LGBTQ relationship and sex education compulsory in the Welsh curriculum.

This change does more than show we've moved on from Section 28, which was officially repealed in 2003. Instead, it actively challenges the heteronormativity of education in Wales. As Williams stated when introducing the legislation in the Senedd, "Thirty years ago, Margaret Thatcher denounced local education authorities for teaching children that 'they have an inalienable right to be gay'. I want all our learners to know that they have an inalienable right to be happy."

This is not the first time Wales has pulled ahead of the rest of the UK in terms of LGBTQ inclusion. Earlier this year, Stonewall named the Welsh Assembly the top LGBTQ employer in Britain, and a Welsh man—John Randell—founded the first gender identity clinic in the UK. Still, while progress is made in businesses and buildings, LGBTQ hate crime is at an all-time high in Wales and the rest of the UK, which is why education reform on this subject feels not just revolutionary, but a necessity.

The change in curriculum will be rolled out in 2022 and will require all schools—including religious schools—to teach relationships and sexuality education (shortened to RSE) that is inclusive of LGBTQ issues. Williams explains to VICE that the four years leading up to the change will be focused on "developing the content alongside teachers and learners to make sure we get this process right and that we're delivering on what young people are asking of us."

This statutory requirement won't be relegated to one lesson a week in PSE, or an awkward hour of biology, but will be applied to every subject. Teachers will be engaging with LGBTQ topics in regards to RSE in a number of ways, "from gender rights in humanities to building self-esteem and empathy through the expressive arts," says Williams.


WATCH: What It Means to Be Gender Fluid


Of course, balancing a new curriculum to include all aspects of LGBTQ issues while including other relationship and sex education will be a difficult task, and it's already been met with skepticism.

Harriet PD—a Welsh Women’s Officer who organized the first LGBTQ club night in Merthyr Tydfil last year—suggests, "This legislation needs to have a particular focus on trans inclusivity, not merely focusing on LGB issues—not to say that they aren't important. I hope this education is fully backed up by providing inclusive and sensitive government training for teachers."

PD, who grew up queer but closeted in Rhondda Cynon Taff, also believes that education reform is fundamental when it comes to creating and promoting equality in British society. Her belief is that if she "had this type of education at school I would have been much more comfortable in discussing my sexuality and probably would have come out sooner." Similar sentiments have been shared by young people for years.

"This type of legislation is important and will help younger people," says PD. "It will help them to take up space in their sex-ed lessons, discuss their own personal experience, talk about the diversity and spectrum of sexuality, and finally, hopefully, make their peers understand that sexual 'normality' is a creation. We are building a new future."

While journalists and young people have asked for this reform—and are encouraged by the change coming from the Welsh Assembly Government—the push for an LGBTQ inclusive education was initiated by a study conducted by Emma Renold, a Professor of Childhood Studies at Cardiff University. Her expert panel found that present SRE education in Wales didn’t address young people's diverse needs, particularly in relation to LGBTQ+ and other minority sex, gender, sexual identities, expressions, experiences, relationships, and rights.

"One of the most damaging legacies of Section 28 was that schools have found it difficult to provide fully inclusive sex and relationship education—struggling to respond to the diverse needs of their learners, rather than following a 'one size fits all' approach," Williams explains. "Sex and relationship education hasn't stretched beyond the biological aspects of human relationships, and that’s just not good enough."

The changes in sexual education should mean that relationships, rights, and respect will be taught hand-in-hand with sex. This is radical in nature, with Wales not only the first UK country to implement this education as statutory, but one of the first in the world. There'll be less need for students to take it upon themselves to create their own LGBTQ groups to educate their peers because everyone will be taught from the age of five about these issues—across all subjects, across all schools. "I want all learners to feel proud of who they are, and I want our teachers to feel that they can fully support all our learners," says Williams.

"Attitudes are changing, and have shifted quite dramatically, but you should never take anything for granted. The fact is, prejudice still remains, and we as a government have a moral and civic duty to do everything we can to tackle it, wherever it occurs in our society," Williams continues. "Education is absolutely fundamental to this and I am deeply proud of the changes we’ll be making; it’s one of the most effective ways we can tackle all forms of discrimination."

Giving youth support in their classrooms and schools, backed up by changes to the curriculum focused on promoting positive LGBTQ relationships and thoughtful sexual education for LGBTQ topics, will affect how a whole generation perceives people who aren’t straight. From a young age, children will learn to embrace diversity in themselves and others.

It's been four years since Attitude Editor-in-Chief Cliff Joannou brought up the need for same-sex education in all British schools. Following the announcement it will be rolled out in Welsh schools, here's hoping the rest of the UK will follow their lead.

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

Follow Georgina Jones on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2ISx38o
via cheap web hosting

Birthday Boy Rudy Giuliani Got Booed at Yankee Stadium and It Cured My Depression

I had a dark weekend. Bad feelings polluted my tired mind as I idled around doing nothing. But in a bout of self-destruction, I opened Twitter, and was rewarded with an unexpected jolt of bliss: a video of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani getting booed at a Yankees game on his 74th birthday.

"The New York Yankees wish a very happy birthday to Mayor Giuliani," the announcer bellowed. Immediately, the crowd began to jeer. And for good reason—the former mayor is now President Trump's attorney, and New Yorkers are less than keen on what our Brooklyn-born chief executive is doing to our fragile country.

For anyone who doesn't support Trump, one of the most difficult parts of his presidency is the lingering feeling of helplessness—things are bad and there's nothing we can but watch it all crumble, and vote in the next election. If you're a New Yorker like me, you know your vote in the presidential election won't decide jackshit because the state always goes blue, and thanks to the electoral college, that doesn't matter too much.

But as it turns out, booing a Trump crony at a Yankees game on his birthday, or watching a video of that happening, is almost a cathartic release. As if New York is saying, We see what you're doing, Rudy, and we don't like it, so we're gonna make sure that you know how unloved you are in your own city.

I highly recommend watching if you're looking to feel a twinge of joy in this twisted, cruel world.

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

Follow Eve Peyser on Twitter and Instagram.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2xnTi0F
via cheap web hosting

Dad of the Kid 'Spider-Man' Rescued from a Balcony Was Out Playing 'Pokémon Go'

On Saturday, a Malian immigrant scaled an apartment building in Paris to rescue a toddler who was dangling from a fourth-floor balcony, becoming an overnight hero after footage of the incredible feat went viral. By Monday, the story had made international headlines and 22-year-old Mamoudou Gassama, dubbed the "Spider-Man of Paris," had been offered French citizenship by President Emmanuel Macron. But one crucial question still hadn't been answered: How the hell did that kid wind up on the balcony in the first place?

According to CNN, the toddler was left home alone while his dad was roaming the streets of Paris playing Pokémon Go. Prosecutor François Molins said the four-year-old's father had gone out shopping when—on his way back from the store—he apparently decided trying to catch a Bulbasaur or whatever was more important than, you know, making sure his toddler was safe. Meanwhile, the kid had fallen from their apartment on the sixth floor, managing to catch himself on the fourth-floor balcony before Gassama saved his life.

Most of the world stopped playing Pokémon Go back in 2016, just a few months after it got people into all kinds of terrible situations when it debuted that July. Players found themselves getting shot at, stabbed, falling into ponds, and traipsing through land mines all in the hopes of catching them all. But apparently not everyone was able to let the fad die out, and now it looks like the kid's father could be facing serious jail time—up to two years behind bars and a $35,000 fine, the BBC reports.

Meanwhile, French authorities have taken custody of the four-year-old while they interview his mother, who's reportedly moving to Paris in June to help raise him. Hopefully, like the rest of us, she's already given up on the mobile craze.

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

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2si6j6U
via cheap web hosting

How Putin's Russia Became Mafia Heaven

Mark Galeotti has been interested in all things Russia as far back as he can remember. The British-born author and expert on international crime, who writes regularly for the Moscow Times and is currently based in Prague, is a historian by training. His interest in the underworld dates back to 1988—the stretch preceding the Iron Curtain’s fall—when he was working on his doctorate in the Soviet Union.

Galoetti's research consisted in part of meeting with veterans of the Soviet war in Afghanistan soon after they came back from the front—before visiting them again a year later to see if they had acclimated back to normal life. While some adapted, he noticed an alarming number seemed to be hanging around in the shadows, working for dubious businessmen pilfering state assets. The idea that organized crime might proliferate in what, at that time, remained a police state fascinated Galeotti. It drove home a truism that applies as much in New Jersey as Moscow: Just because you can't see the mob on the street doesn't mean it's not there.

Thanks to insider contacts on the ground in Russia, Galeotti—who has written for VICE in the past—embarked on a project 30 years in the making. The Vory: Russia's Super Mafia, out Tuesday from Yale University Press, is the result. Galeotti digs into the origins of Russia's notorious vor-v-zakone (thief-in-laws), explores their rise in concert with the collapse of the USSR, investigates how their values and practices have influenced modern-day Russia, probes how Putin has kept them in check, and touches on what ties, if any, President Trump might have to this vast underworld.

I called him up for a chat about a story that, even for an ex-con obsessed with La Cosa Nostra like me, had its share of bizarre and surprising episodes.



VICE: One thing that fascinated me was the long arc of the history here. Can you talk about how Stalin's Gulags shaped the men that became the thief-in-laws, and laid the structure for what would become the Russian Mafia?
Mark Galeotti: There had been an underworld culture beforehand, the so called Vorovskoy Mir, the Thieves' World. They had tattoo[s] and slang of their own, but it was the experience of being swept up in this whirlwind of horror that was the Gulag labor camp system [that set this in motion]. Stalin wanted to run these camps cheap and offered the Vory a deal: those willing to collaborate with the state would get a much easier life [in the brutal gulags].

Stalin had worked with gangsters before the revolution, organizing bank raids and even piracy to raise money for the Bolshevik revolutionaries. [He got them] to basically become the security guards and foremen to keep the bulk of the prison population—the political prisoners—hard at work. Now that meant going against one of the fundamental elements of the old code of the Vory, which was you never, ever, ever cooperate with the authorities.

But there were enough of them who actually thought it was a good deal and they became the so-called "sukas" [or] "bitches" in the eyes of the traditionalists. Through the 1930s and the first half of the 40s, these two kind of different criminal groups didn't really interact much. The collaborators knew better then to try and to mess with the traditionalists, and the traditionalists knew if they messed with the collaborators the state would come down hard on them.

I've been in prison and that sounds like a situation ready to explode. Which is exactly what happened, right?
After the Second World War you suddenly had a change in the balance of power. You had more prisoners coming in, and essentially this cold war that had existed between the two groups couldn't last. You had this explosion of violence, basically a civil war that was fought out within the Vory inside the Gulag system in the late 1940s and early 50s—a bloody war fought with lynchings and people turning whatever sharp implements they could find at their disposal [into weapons]. When it came down to it, ultimately, the collaborators won, not least because the state backed them and gave them opportunities to win.

Stalin died in 1953 and the Gulags opened up. All these criminals come out—these new collaborator-criminals—and basically colonized the rest of the Soviet underworld. It was a whole new culture of Vorovskoy Mir. Which was basically: We're gangsters, we're hard men, we have our own culture, our code and things. We see that because the state is so powerful, it's worth collaborating—when it's in our interests.

They were the judges, the community leaders, the high priests of the criminal world. Not necessarily gang leaders, but the kind of people who could resolve disputes and lay down the law, quite literally. That was essential, because all underworlds work out ways in which they resolve disputes. Whether it's La Cosa Nostra sit-downs or whatever. The way the Russians did it was to have this cast of highly respected criminals who [are] able to be a judge.

Why did the collapse of the USSR feed the growth here so astronomically?
Suddenly you had a new country, just created at the stroke of a pen. This had been a country dominated by the Communist Party, it's economy was planned centrally, and suddenly it’s a democracy—a capitalist free-market system. All the old rules no longer seemed to apply. The old power structures were in crisis. It was a period of total chaos. From the point of view of organized crime, this was a massive opportunity.

The various gangs that had existed largely in the shadows, when they were still worried about the state and KGB, suddenly could rise up. Everything was there for the taking: industries, assets, property, control over territory. There was no sense of turf lines or who's more powerful than who, and there was a massive explosion of violence. All the gangs were trying to grab everything they could with both hands before someone else got it. It was sort of a war of all against all.

From this kind of Darwinian mess, what emerged were about a dozen or so major alliances. They were not like formal gangs—not like a New York crime family with a single Godfather—but alliances with lots of smaller gangs. It was Moscow's gangs against everyone else. They regarded themselves as being the elite and had a lot more money and power. By the late 1990s, we were beginning to see turf lines being drawn. The pecking order had been established and the violence was beginning to go down, even before Putin came into power.

A key difference, it seems, between the Vory and the mob in the United States—besides their relative strength in this current moment—is their influence over the rest of the country. Americans love mob movies and The Sopranos, but Russia seems like a whole other level, where organized crime values, codes, and practices essentially mafia-ized the country. How do you explain that?
The Vory were amongst the people at the forefront of creating the new political and economic system in the 1990s. Let's be honest: Russia is run by people who are stealing left, right, and center. Its a kleptocracy. They're not doing it in usual mob ways, like shaking people down on the street corner. They’re doing it through government contracts and corrupt sweetheart deals. There’s a considerable overlap between how the gangsters operate and how the elite operate. The boundaries between the two are pretty permeable.

Capitalism emerged in the midst of mob wars in Russia and the idea was: it's just about making money. We know that working capitalism relies on institutions, rule of law, property rights, and trust in the system. But that's not how the Russians saw it. They only cared about money, and if that's all you're interested in, a lot of criminal methods seem quite appealing. I'm amazed at the extent to which one sees things like blackmail and extortion being used as business tactics within Russia.

What is normal and acceptable behavior within the business and political class is clearly heavily influenced by tactics that say laws don't matter—what matters is actually getting the job done. I'd almost say that every Russian businessman is a crook. The Vory were part of and amongst the stakeholders—the founding fathers of the New Russia. We shouldn't be surprised to find their values enshrined in this country.

He's often described as being in bed with financial criminals of all stripes, but Vladimir Putin, despite his history with gangsters, has kept the Vory in check. Why is that?
When Vladimir Putin was a deputy of the mayor in Saint Petersburg in the mid 1990s, his job was to be the liaison with everyone who needed to be talked to, whether it was foreigners, businessmen or organized crime. He was in charge of making sure the city ran smoothly. There was some kind of interaction with Vladimir S. Barsukov, who was known as the Night Governor. The idea was that by day the official authorities were in charge, but by night Barsukov ran Saint Petersburg. Then Putin's career took off, he went to Moscow, became Prime Minister, and then president.

That's not necessarily a problem as long as Barsukov knows the limits, knows the rules of the game. The problem was that after a certain point, he was just too visible and it began to be a bit embarrassing to Putin. He was a sort of walking skeleton in Putin's closet. In 2007, they decided to take him down. They air lifted in police commandos from Moscow. It was basically a full military operation to grab Barsukov, then they airlifted him straight back out back to Moscow. What they were doing was simply wanting to show it doesn't matter how big you are, the state is back and we can reach out and take down anyone.

You describe Russia as a kleptocracy, where there's no distinction between crime, politics, and law enforcement. What does this mean for America and the world going forward?
It's a problem because Russia is a serious player in world politics and global economics. The trouble is that Russian kleptocracy and the close ties between the Kremlin, business, and organized crime means that Russia can infect other countries with it's own practices. Putin is engaged in this kind of political war with the West—he’s effectively trying to weaponize Russian organized crime against the west.

We have seen Russian-based organized crime groups being used to kill enemies of his, to gather intelligence, to move spies across boarders, and raise money for Putin by supporting particular groups or media outlets that he likes and are good at spreading disinformation.

These are all serious problems, but there’s a bit of hope. I think there’s this slow build up of pressures for some kind of change inside Russia. I think you're getting a population that is tired of corruption and an elite that has outgrown the gangsters and finds them a bit of an embarrassment. I don't think were going to see it while Putin is still in the Kremlin, but after Putin goes, which might be two years or six years, or longer, it's going to happen. There’s a decent chance that we're going to start seeing a kind of a slow fight back against organized crime in Russia. But for now, this is clearly a problem for us all.

What do you think the Mueller investigations into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia will uncover in regards to the Vory, if anything? Trump has a history of Italian mob ties in the US and some of his lackeys like consigliere Michael Cohen have even claimed to be tight with Russian mobsters.
From Donald Trump down, through Michael Cohen, for me what I see unfolding in the States is not so much a story about everyday Russian organized crime so much as a story of unusual American greed, of a lack of morals and a depressing belief that any business is good business, regardless with whom it is conducted. I have seen no serious evidence of any explicit link between Trump and Russian mobsters. Rather, what I have seen is evidence of the extent to which the Trump Organization seems to have been willing to engage with dubious investors and buyers—some Russian, many not—whom more reputable corporations would not have touched. In the process, it is likely it laundered money from all kinds of questionable sources, but that is not the same as a direct link to gangsters. Above all, this is a story about corruption, framed in both legal and moral terms, and about a horrifying absence of ethics and transparency.

This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. Learn more about Galeotti's book here.

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

Follow Seth Ferranti on Twitter.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2LEqq7H
via cheap web hosting

Monday, May 28, 2018

Snoop Dogg Making The World’s Biggest Gin and Juice Is What We Need Right Now

Years ago, I was shamed out of drinking gin and juice when I realized it wasn’t as classy as I thought it was, though the fact that I used to chug it straight from a mix I poured into a Tropicana jug probably didn’t help.

Nonetheless, this poor man’s mimosa remains dear to my heart, if only for nostalgia’s sake. And I see I’m not alone in that. A quarter of a century after he made gin and juice famous on Doggystyle, the world’s chillest grandpa, Snoop Dogg, is breathing new relevance into his highball of choice.

Snoop set a Guinness record for pouring the world’s largest “paradise cocktail” —a big ass gin and juice—at the BottleRock Napa Valley festival over the weekend.

A delightful video, which I’ve already viewed six times, shows Snoop, Warren G, and Top Chef Michael Voltaggio pouring bottles of Hendricks gin into a tub of juice sitting in a “glass” that’s five-feet-tall and three-feet-wide. The finished product was a total of 550 litres, and consisted of 180 bottles of gin, according to Mercury News. My favorite bit is when Snoop struggles to stir it up with a straw that looks like a red stripper pole. He really puts his whole body into it.

The event was sponsored by the world’s most pretentious brand, Williams Sonoma, so maybe gin and juice has finally classed itself up after all.

Follow Manisha Krishnan on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE CA.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2xn0TNb
via cheap web hosting

Does ‘Return of the Jedi’ Actually Suck?

So, Solo: A Star Wars Story came out this weekend and it’s arguably the first financial failure in the history of the Star Wars films.

Despite Donald Glover’s “pansexual” take on Lando Calrissian, it appears the film’s troubled production and mixed reviews did it in. It’s now been a rough(ish) six months for the franchise.

Despite making $1.3 billion and receiving mostly glowing reviews from critics, The Last Jedi was a (needlessly) controversial film among hardcore fans, with more than 100,000 fans signing a petition urging Disney to scrap it from the official canon. One idiot went so far as to re-cut the film to not have any women in it.

But many critics praised The Last Jedi, mostly in tones similar to The Atlantic, which said it was, “arguably the best the franchise has offered since Empire.”

That last description has been buzzing around in my head since I first read it in the middle of December. The best since Empire?

Yes, the prequels sucked, The Force Awakens was a glossy retread of A New Hope, and Rogue One was a flawed but interesting addition to the universe, but in our haste to hold The Empire Strikes Back up as a near-perfect piece of cinema and compare all subsequent films to it, I believe Return of the Jedi (1983) receives short shrift among Star Wars fans.

Many “best of” lists rank it anywhere from fourth to seventh in the series, and while Empire earned its spot at No. 1, is Jedi—the conclusion of the original trilog y—really as bad as its reputation says it is? Given Solo, the prequel trilogy and the new movies, I believe Return of the Jedi has to be considered one of the strongest entries in the entire franchise.

My first foray into the Star Wars universe wasn’t actually the films, but the popular space battle simulator X-Wing released in 1993. Seven-year-old me was obsessed no, addicted to this game. It allowed you to climb behind the controls of the Rebel’s starfighters and destroy Tie Fighters and Imperial Star Destroyers. I was so addicted my parents hid the code book required to log into the game (but I had memorized many of the codes so that didn’t stop me). I also wore out two joysticks playing the game.

It wasn’t until two years later that I saw my first film in the original trilogy. My friend was shocked that I hadn’t seen any, and immediately grabbed his 1995 THX box set and popped Empire into the VHS player. “This is the best one,” he assured me.

A few months later my own box set of the movies arrived as a birthday present from my parents, and I finally watched the rest of the trilogy.

A New Hope receives near-universal praise for revolutionizing the science fiction genre and for introducing iconic characters in one of the best world building exercises put to film when it was released in 1977. Who were the mystical Jedi and what was the Light Side and Dark Side? Who was Darth Vader? And Obi-Wan Kenobi? And what was up with those laser swords?

But it’s easy to forget the film has some pretty clunky dialogue and a whiny Luke Skywalker, reminiscent of Anakin in the prequels. And to 2018 viewers, it’s pretty slow for a blockbuster.

Then, in 1980 Empire flipped the story on its head; it stuffed its main character inside the guts of a dead snow camel, it forced the good guys to retreat and scatter across the universe, it double-crossed our heroes, trapped one in carbonite (whatever the hell that is), turned the lead character into an amputee, and has the most famous twist ever filmed in a mainstream movie. It’s widely viewed as perhaps one of the best sequel movies in history, and in many ways is similar to the subversion used throughout Last Jedi.

Yet when you go back and read the original reviews you’ll find that, much like The Last Jedi, Empire divided critics. Vincent Canby wrote in the New York Times that it “is not a truly terrible movie. It’s a nice movie. It’s not, by any means, as nice as Star Wars.”

Meanwhile, Cinefantastique labeled Empire as, “A lifeless copy of Star Wars propelled chiefly on the momentum of that earlier film.” Where have we heard that before?

When Return of the Jedi hit theatres in 1983, it too received similar lukewarm reviews, and today is derided as a lazy re-write of A New Hope that relied on the same plot device (the Death Star) to drive the action, suffered from the return of George Lucas’ stilted dialogue, used Ewok teddy bears to shamelessly sell toys, and employed the tired “nature versus technology” moralizing.

But for me, Return of the Jedi is the film that has evoked my strongest emotional tie to the Star Wars universe ever since I first saw it more than 20 years ago.

Let’s begin with the conclusion of Luke Skywalker’s journey . Throughout Empire, Luke (and the viewer) is repeatedly told hate, fear, and anger all lead to the Dark Side. And in Return of the Jedi, Luke is again warned by Obi-Wan to bury his feelings deep down, or they could be used to serve the Emperor.

It is this knowledge and fear of what could tip Luke to the Dark Side that makes the epic throne room lightsaber battle between Luke and Vader in so compelling. We see Luke fighting his emotions, but once Vader detects the presence of Luke’s sister and threatens to turn her to the Dark Side instead, Luke can’t hold back any longer.

He uses his anger and rage to overpower Vader, but after he chops off his father’s hand and see only wires and circuits (then looks at his own robotic hand lost in Empire) he steps back from the precipice of the Dark Side and tosses away his weapon.

He did the seemingly impossible; he toed the line between Light and Dark, but didn’t fall. It’s a fantastic character arc and has led some to believe he is a so-called “Gray Jedi.”

Admittedly, the film does suffer in some areas. The opening act to rescue Han Solo from Jabba the Hutt is too long and no Hollywood executive would likely approve putting Princess Leia in that gold bikini today, but where this movie truly excels is the way it seamlessly weaves three different plots (the throne room, the battle on Endor, and the Death Star space battle) to tell an exciting, cohesive conclusion.

Look no further than Empire to see a movie that struggles with multiple simultaneous storylines; one of the film’s biggest criticisms is how director Irvin Kershner handles the timeline of Luke’s training with Yoda and the activities on Cloud City. Did Luke’s training only last a few days, or were they at the floating city for weeks?

Jedi also features the best space battle in the entire series (and with a name like Star Wars I am going to put a big emphasis on the star warring) as the Rebellion tries desperately to destroy the second Death Star. There’s the mounting tension as the team struggles to lower the shields on Endor, and the dread that clouds Lando’s face when he realizes the shield is still operational when the fleet arrives, punctuated with the infamous line, “It’s a trap!” from Admiral Ackbar.

“But the Ewoks!!” I hear the Internet scream. Yes, fine, the Ewoks. George Lucas originally wanted to have Wookiees in the climactic final act, and even considered using a reptilian species instead, but inevitable script changes meant they were changed to the cute, cuddly teddy bears you either love or loathe.

But they didn’t seem out of place to me when I was a kid watching the movies, given the vastness of the Star Wars universe, and their treehouse forts and clever traps made for fun viewing. Even as an adult I can appreciate their role in the film. Besides, it was pretty fun to watch two enormous logs crush the Imperial walker like an egg (and who didn’t shed a tear when the one Ewok mourned its fallen comrade?).

And despite all his Oscar cred, the infamous “Yub Nub” Ewok celebration song is one of John Williams’ biggest contributions to popular culture, even though it was tragically changed for the 1997 special edition.

Empire is the better film, no doubt, but for me Return of the Jedi is the film that perhaps embodies the spirit of Star Wars the best—a big, bright space opera where good triumphs over evil using laser swords, X-Wings are the most badass ships in the galaxy, and carnivorous teddy bears feed on the flesh of their vanquished enemies.

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

This article originally appeared on VICE CA.



from VICE https://ift.tt/2IQr7Nb
via cheap web hosting