WHAT THE *BLEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!!?????*

In the three years that I've been writing these blogs, I have come across some weird and wacky news stories. Seriously, some of the stories that I have chosen to comment on have left me shaking my head and wondering if the human race is evolving into a new level of idiocy or regressing back to the caveman days. During the past three years I have commented on news stories involving a middle-aged actor marrying a schoolgirl, a guy who came up with the 'brilliant idea' to light an explosive device up the part of his body where the sun don't shine, a crazy parent who published a book showing the 'positive effects' of exposing children to a potentially fatal disease, people who walk around wearing diapers and behaving like babies, famous people who say or do stupid things and so on and so forth.
Yes, it never ceases to amaze me how we as human beings, the most advanced species on this earth, can come up with new and stupid ways to make fools of ourselves. I honestly didn't think it could get any weirder.

Until yesterday.

I came across a news article on nbnchicago.com that left me shocked and speechless. The article's title was short but disturbing: Police Say Man Sexually Abused His Peacock.
Yup, told you it was disturbing. David Beckman, a 64-year old man from Roselle, Illinois in the US, was accused of sexually assaulting his pet peacock. He was visited at his home by police following reports that he had solicited a child and well. They found the bird, named Phyl, dead in Beckman's garage with signs that it had been sexually abused.
The article stated that Beckman was facing three charges of harassment by telephone, unlawful possession of drugs, two counts of marijuana possession, attempted indecent solicitation of a child, cruelty to animals and two counts of battery.
According to the huffingtonpost.com, he was being held at DuPage County Jail on a $10,000 bond and has an arraignment scheduled for June 12.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.
 

Wow. What do you say after reading that? I didn't know whether to feel scared or repulsed, or whether or not to giggle at the article's disgusting but frank headline. Seriously, it's bad enough that he tried to make advances to a child but to then direct his rage to an innocent peacock? I thought this kind of crap only happened on really sick TV shows and movies! He certainly put some of the lunatics that I have covered over the past three years to shame. Silly, life-threatening stunts, dangerous pranks and assorted acts of idiocy are nothing compared to what this demented creature did.

Then again, the article did note that he was charged for drug possession so perhaps he was not in a sound state of mind when he committed his atrocity. If that is the case I can only imagine how he'd react once he is made aware of what he had done to poor Phyl. We'd probably hear reports that he had hanged himself in his cell, his last words being 'Forgive me, Phyl!!!!!!'

Ok, unnecessary joke but I couldn't resist.

Well, not much more to say, other than that to prey on children is as cowardly as it is disgusting, but to prey on children and animals.....? I'm pretty sure there is a special place in hell for people who do that stuff. In the meantime, I hope that this debauched and immoral ogre gets the punishment he deserves and is locked up behind thick glass for good. That means one less predator roaming the streets terrorising children - and animals. There's a sentence I never thought I'd use.

Dear Mike

An open letter from Bernd to Mike Jeffries, CEO of US clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch.

Dear Mike,

To be completely honest, while I have been aware of the clothing company that you preside over I have not heard about you until yesterday. I'm not exactly the sort of guy who follows the fashion industry and its whimsical world of trendy clothes, weird outfits, eccentric designers and underweight models. I read an article about you yesterday and all I have to say is you are a shallow bully and a hypocrite.

The article, posted on the generation Y-themed website Elite Daily, was titled Abercrombie & Fitch CEO explains why he hates fat chicks. In it, you were quoted as stating that you only want good-looking people to wear your brand and that overweight people can never have access to your goods because they are not cool enough to be deemed worthy of wearing your threads. While this may be seen as limiting your demographic, you claim that making your goods available to everyone would make the brand less desirable. Your defence is that your brand (which is primarily marketed towards teenagers and people in their early 20's) is akin to the popular and trendy brand that popular schoolkids like to wear and that, therefore, their ugly and unpopular peers shouldn't have access to them.
You also claim to only hire good-looking people to work in your stores so that they, in turn, can only attract other good-looking customers to enter your stores. Furthermore, you concede to having some XL and XXL sizes in your stores - but for males only since some male athletes like gridiron players are too big to fit into standard sizes.
But large sizes for women are unacceptable, according to you. Why? Because fat 'chicks' will never be part of the 'in' crowd.

Mr. Jeffries, the article noted that other retailers such as H&M and American Eagle cater to people of all sizes but you refuse to follow their lead. On the one hand, good on you for sticking to your vision and your beliefs (shallow as they are), but are you aware that you live in the country with the highest obesity rate in the developed world and that the problem is only getting worse? There are only so many 'thin' and 'beautiful' people (your words, not mine) that you can market your brand towards. Also, by limiting your demographic, you are sure to lose to your competitors sooner rather than later. I can hear the dudes at H&M and American Eagle licking their lips already.
Besides, nobody wants to be told that they are not good enough to wear your brand, which I'd imagine your salespeople are trained to do should the 'wrong' person walk through the doors of your stores. People who are scorned in a humiliating manner such as this WILL talk and that could mean less business and more headaches for you.

Also, Mr. Jeffries, for a guy who thinks he has the right to judge people on their physical appearance, you sure are sorely lacking in that department. No disrespect, but in my humble opinion, you look like Peter Helliar, Oliver Kahn, Donald Trump and an alien rolled into one hideous package. Does your aversion for 'ugly' and fat people stem from childhood bullying or, as the article pointed out, are you only surrounding yourself with good-looking people now to fulfil some childhood fantasy?
I hate to compare you with one of history's greatest villains, but one of the reasons why people laugh at Adolf Hitler today (besides the moustache, comb-over and psycho persona) is that he deemed the Aryan race to be the 'master race' despite not being a blonde-haired, blue-eyed man.
In your case Mr. Jeffries, you're an ugly dude who preaches that only good-looking people should wear your clothes. Talk about hypocritical.

Handsome fella, isn't he?

And need I remind you that in 2004 your 'stay bonus' dropped from $US12 million to $US6 million after the original was deemed too excessive? In 2008 you were deemed by the Corporate Library as the year's 'Highest Paid Worst Performer' after receiving a compensation package worth $US71.8 million.
And in 2009, it was revealed that during the retail recession, you refused to offer discounts and lower prices until your stores posted losses for 17 consecutive months - all the while still refusing to open your doors to everybody. Yeah, well done, Mike.

Finally, Mr. Jeffries, despite the growing obesity crisis there in the US (and other parts of the world), there are still people who are turning their lives around through diet and exercise. And what is the first thing that people who have managed to lose weight tend to do? Buy a new wardrobe. Mr. Jeffries, if you had only been more open and generous with your brand you could have had new customers dropping by for a visit but I'm pretty sure that thanks to your big mouth and superficial views, these people would pass your store, give it the ol' middle finger salute (or hurl a brick through a window) then keep walking. Great insults last a long time, Mr. Jeffries. People never forget them.
And also, just to let you know, a majority of the readers who have left their feedback on the article believe that you are unattractive, an idiot, a jackass, a jerk, that your goods are unimaginative, repetitive and far past their prime and that you really need to keep up with the times and trends. Oh yeah, and also, middle aged men who use the word 'dude' repeatedly are seen as sad and pathetic losers. Can't be too good for the already-tarnished image, buddy!

Yours sincerely,

Bernd.

PS: Nothing personal. Just telling it like it is.

You're a professional, ACT LIKE IT!!!!!!

Wade Graham in action for the Cronulla Sharks

There are many stupid ways to land yourself in hot water at your job. Playing childish pranks, vandalising someone's property, bullying co-workers, stealing work supplies etc.

For Cronulla Sharks rugby league player Wade Graham, he could very well face consequences for an act of immaturity that, quite frankly, didn't need to happen. The 22-year old back-rower went to an interview with The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA). Unfortunately for Wade, he showed up wearing a T-shirt, cargo pants, thongs and his cap on backwards, looking more like a bloke headed out for a house party than a serious, FORMAL interview with a governing body that was investigating the use of drugs within his club.
Graham was apparently advised to wear a suit to the interview but he chose to ignore it and his defiance was rewarded with the possibility of a fine from the NRL for showing a lack of professionalism in a serious setting. He issued an apology for his lack of fashion sense and failure to take the meeting with ASADA seriously but it was too little too late. Not only can he receive a fine for a silly, avoidable mistake but his outfit has also made him a laughing stock among journalists and especially fashion writers.

Wade Graham's 'formal attire' for his meeting with ASADA

You know, when I was younger, I applied for a job in the city and turned up to a group interview wearing an outfit that still makes me cringe whenever I think about it. I wore a short sleeved polo shirt that was way too big for my slim frame, pants what we so high that the beltline may as well have been on my nipples and I didn't bother to comb my hair properly. Needless to say, I didn't get the job. Granted, my lack of experience in the field of work may have played a part but I am certain that my ghastly outfit contributed to my failure.
Wade should have known that when it comes to these formal settings, image is everything, especially if you consider yourself a professional in your field of work, in his case, sport. And if that formal setting involves a governing body that was doing investigative work for illegal practices in your workplace, it pretty much goes without saying that you have to represent your employers to the best of your ability and the first thing they notice is how you look. Way to give those hecklers that stereotype guys in your field of work as a bunch of low-IQ morons extra ammunition, Wade!

Some have suggested that Wade's defiance was a sign of him and his teammates' anger at how the ASADA investigations have sullied the image of their club and players but if that was the case, why couldn't he show up looking like a true professional and during the course of the interview, tell them how disappointed he felt that his club was getting a bad reputation? He'll probably be reprimanded for whinging but it's a lot better than showing up and trying to convey some kind of message through your silly outfit and not only failing to spread that message, but getting punished because of it.
As part of his apology, Wade stated that he took the meeting seriously and that his outfit was an accidental mistake and not a sign of defiance. I'm sorry, but that is a weak excuse. If he had every intention of taking that meeting seriously then he would have dressed accordingly. You're a professional, Wade. Act like it!