Submit an Article | Bookmarked Articles
Viewing Articles About All - Page 31
| "Metal" is not Music; It's disgrace. | March 13, 2006, 12:44PM |
 by: El.phaggot |
|
"Hey! I have an idea. We're all angry teenagers amounting to nothing in the world and doing nothing with our lives. Let's just bash these instruments and scream jibberish into the microphone at the top of our lungs, and add some evil words like Satan or Fuck. Yeah, then we'll be cool." Those are the thoughts of every metal band out there. Nonsense, teen angst and anger. These people are over thirty years old, making millions by being stupid and immature. Look at "Axl Rose". He can't spell the word Axel because he was brought to idiocy with this music. Smart people in Metal bands? Maybe. Give them thirteen seconds of "headbanging" and all they'll be able to say is "ACK! MY NECK!" in-between their conniptions. The fans of Metal are generally children, although some adults never grow out of it. They're quick to anger, and prone to act violently and talk tough. They generally have no wit, and are useless as humans. Dead end jobs and meagre paychecks. Trying to have intelligent conversation is squeezing water from the sun. Alot of these kids think Slipknot, Manson and Murderdolls are "gothic idols". With no understanding of a subculture, how would they know the real idols such as Rozz Williams, or Robert Smith? They don't. These teenagers believe that by claiming to be "goth", they will get more attention. Add that to the list. With so many websites over-run by the Metalhead population, where can one ever find an intelligent source of life again? Forums - 1337 5p34k. MySpace - zOmG gNa CuT mAhSiLf. "VampireFreaks" - "You rated someone a 1, you're deleted.". In closing, I say Metalheads are almost all stupid. There have been some slight indication of a "Mutant Gene", where some actually have intelligence, but as said, this is a Mutant genome. It will most likely appear only randomly in probably 1/10,000 subjects. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [16 comments] |
|
| The Illusion of Individuality | March 12, 2006, 5:38PM |
 by: nuclear_carbomb |
|
Ask yourself for me: what does this title, these words; "The Illusion of Individuality”: what do they say to you? Do they stir up some guilt in a dark place inside of you? Are we really lying to ourselves? Do you suffer from it? Are you above it? Are you a slave to it? This is a debate which has always held my interest. What shall we call an individual – someone who is unique and interesting? Someone who merely stands out from most? What is this illusive quality? How is it defined? This speaks to me as something vital to the Darkstarlings community. I won’t name anyone in particular, obviously, but there are a lot of people out there who are not questioning themselves. Not only on this site, but throughout western society, there are people who call themselves individual. They think that they dress differently; they think they stand out, and they’re proud of it. They are special and unique…….. but yet, a cynically quick assessment would lead anyone to believe that in their appearance and music taste, they are identical to their friends in almost every possible way. Let’s not deny it – there are quite blatantly several “subcultures” out there to which it is possible to apply almost any teenager, and increasingly, almost any person to – Emo, Goth, Metal, Punk, Rap, "Preps" (whatever that means) Jocks, etc etc – what are these musical/fashion/trend generalisations, these labels? What do they mean, really? I don’t need to sit here and tell you that “emo” kids in general wear tight jeans, subscribe to Myspace and listen to hawthorn heights, or that “Goths” are generally obsessed with anything Tim Burton produces, own no clothes in colours (British!) other than black, and so on and so on, et cetera et cetera ad infinitium – it doesn’t need to be explained. The real question is; do we walk half-blindly along these paths because we have just found a sector of society with which we automatically agree? Is it merely a grouping of people with similar tastes? Could you call it an artistic movement? Or are we all just trying to find somewhere to fit in with each other? I’m of the opinion there is a mix of people with all these motives within each “subculture”, yet the people on the boundaries are the ones who conform to the stereotype the most. Sometimes we will go with the crowd on a decision in order to get along – but surely this should not run to as deep as who we really are. There’s a more pressing question to this too – are we really defined by the way we look, the things we like and what bands we listen to? Darkstarlings and indeed all profile sites are built on the principle that by writing a profile in which we can list these opinions, we are able to project a reasonably accurate idea of who we really are, and so find people with similar tastes. Often it is much too easy to define ourselves by our answers to these set questions, these lists of bands, films and books, and my pet hate, the “what kind of vampire are you” quizzes. But what does all this really say about ourselves? Surely who we really are is not this collection of opinions, but our values, our feelings, our friends, our relationships – how we love, how we live, and how we die. I have yet to see anyone explain this on an internet site, in speech, the written word, or anywhere else. These concepts are impossible to place into words. In a sense we are all more individual than we could ever wish for. We all have different upbringings, different values, different thoughts, different fingerprints and different heartbeats. Yet in another sense, we are all as one living mass, and we try to group ourselves together. Maybe we should stop defining ourselves and get on with living, but that seems impossible, no-one can change society at a stroke. As strong as greed, strength, anger, sympathy and love, it’s only an instinct of human nature to organise and try to fit in with each other, in the herd, in the tribe, in society – at whatever stage you look at, it’s only the way of nature for this beautiful chaos to organise itself. There are advantages, obviously. In the herd it offered protection. In the tribe it offered security. Now, it’s a good way of identifying people who have similar tastes to your own, and it helps everyone to get along. it gives an amazing sense of belonging and brotherhood with other people you might not even know. These are good things, naturally, and essential for the cohesion of our society. But still, why do we attach ourselves to these generalisations? Why are they necessary? I won’t try and be highminded about it – I probably slot into the “metal” category quite easily – but I’m glad and proud to say I wear plenty of things, enjoy plenty of things, and listen to many bands, none of which fit there at all. (Though if you want to judge whether or not I fit into a neat social pigeonhole, look on my profile) I believe that this can only be a good thing, but I strive to always do and like only what I truly want, and be who I want to be, and not what anyone tells me to like, what to listen to, what life to live and who to be. I’m not saying I always succeed , but I think everyone should look at themselves again, so deep, deep down inside and try to be exactly who they are, and no less. Or do we really want to be one of so many blinded sheep? Postscript - I apologise for the number of rhetorical questions, but there are so many more things to say on the subject, and I hope you can think for yourself. (pretty much the point of the article if you hadn't noticed) And more importantly, some of these are questions which many people out there have been avoiding. Finally, if this article has fucked with your self-image, I can't and I won’t apologise. Don’t be afraid to question yourself, and don't be afraid to deviate from this ridiculus accepted standard of "individuality" to find where you truly belong. | |
topic: Philosophy | |
[reply] [14 comments] |
|
| Terrorism? or Sympophy? | March 12, 2006, 7:28AM |
 by: Murderous_Breeze |
|
Call it bad luck, or call it conspiracy, or even call it racism, but in this day and age every day more and more Muslim people are being portrayed as evil, and either, involved or following the works of such EXTREME groups as Al`Qaeda and Taliban. But what people dont realise is that since the dawning of the Islamic age, Muslim people and followers of Islam have been labelled with such word use as "Terrorist". The only way to get rid of them was to a very well known force back then with the Anglo-saxons, Genocide. If that word sounds extreme for any people, please do so and study about the massacres of the muslims in Jerusalem, or the 200 thousand plus muslims murdered in the name of Christianity in Bosnia, even the African wars of Sedan and Somalia. If that isnt enough evidence, even now George W. Bush going into Iraq to "Liberate" it by destroying hospitals and other potential "Al Qaeda training camps". The world once again has been brain washed by the media machine, forcing you to see images of bearded men wearing "towels" on their heads and holding automatic weapons. And even the recent event with the publishers in Denmark releasing a "humourful" picture of one of Islams greatest symbols if not the most influental, the Prophet Muhammad, with a bomb on his head, while this is funny to most of the world, imagine if i was to draw a picture of Jesus with butter knives through his wrists? that wouldnt be funny would it, but Muslim people have never done that. How can you justify murdering and humiliating another ethnic group? You cant. But the media has surely done a very good job of it. We have lived side by side with Christians for over 900 hundred years, and if you research about history, i guarentee you not once in those 900 years have we had peace amongst one another. We as the new generation can change that, instead of fighting, we can live with each other, dont be drawn into the media with their lies and scandals, the conspiracy of the government is well known world-wide, so why do people still believe it? I dont know, but please do not be the one that does believe in it. Be the one that does something about it. | |
topic: Life | |
[reply] [4 comments] |
|
| I am Pansexual. | March 8, 2006, 5:58PM |
 by: colorofnightfall |
|
One of the question I get asked most frequently online is 'What is pansexual?' As defined by an online pansexual community (i_am_pansexual) pansexuality is: "Do you love someone who is androgynous? Someone who doesn't fit into the restricting categories of male or female? Does gender not matter to you when choosing a partner? Then you may be pansexual. A pansexual is one who can love sexuality in many forms. Much like a bisexual, a pansexual can love a man or a woman but a pansexual can also love transgendered, androgynous and gender fluid people, people who do not feel they fit into categories of male or female. Pansexuals come in all shapes and sizes, all sharing one common goal, sexual freedom." Before we all rush to conclusions as begin labeling pansexuals as 'nymphos' and 'just bi kids trying to be different' stop. I am pansexual. I do not believe in genders and that is why I identify most with this sexual orientation. I am not a nymphomaniac and I do not opt to kiss girls(I am girl, for reference) to gain the attention on the male gender (frankly, I don't care, but that is aside from the main point). To me, Pansexuality means attraction and affection to an individual regardless of their gender or lack there of (alpha 5 beta reductase syndrome is recognized as 'pseudo-hermaphrodism' while they individuals with this syndrom do have a genetic definition of gender [xy or xx] ) . Once again I must ask you to pause before beginning to say 'Hunny there is a difference in genders and if you haven't learned it, you need help.' Let me clap for you before saying that yes, I am quite aware of biological differences between male and female but you know what else are biological differences? Skin color, mental retardation (a lack of enzymes is biological), birth defects and missing limbs. Now while I am also aware of bigotry (insert me clapping, once again) most of us will try and completely disregard these differences in people when we view them. To forestall any comments on this point I am aware of ESE programs and racial profiling. I am trying to speak on a deeper, personality level. To me (and with my outlandish opinions I must respect those of others which is why I specify 'me') gender is completely fluid. Gender typing and gender roles are based on the gender schemas people adopt psychologically at a young age. As defined by a psychology textbook 'the knowledge a little boy has that he is a little boy and the knowledge a little girl has that she is a little girl.' So aside from physical differences (which are actually referred to as one's sex, not gender) we have a pre programmed blue prints of what gender is. Or is it subject to change? Can I be right in saying that what is and isn't defining in gender has changed over the years? Are that not producing skirts for men now(although if we look at the pre-revolutionary french...)? Aren't women allowed to smoke and play sports? Aren't a vast number of fashions designers men? Can't women rival men in marksmanship? I am not trying to play the constantly repeated ANYTHING-BOYS-CAN-DO-GIRLS-CAN-DO-BETTER(and vice versa) game. Thats my point exactly. If boys are doing what girls are doing and girls are doing what boys are doing than what is the big fucking deal? Why must we force girls to use dolls and beat boys who do? Why are we trying so hard to overemphasize gender differences? Stop. There it is. My final command (well for this article at least). Stop making such a big fucking deal out genders. People are people. So you have penis? So you have a vagina? Wow, great for you, have fun with that. We are all what we make ourselves. We are born with a sex, but our genders are up to us. This is not an article telling you to go out and become (sparkles and rainbows here) Pansexual. It is an article to inform and then express an opinion on the provided information, which is sort of the purpose of articles so I think I am doing a damn good job. I hope people can read this and gain a little insight. | |
topic: Various | |
[reply] [2 comments] |
|
| Profile Verification Now Available | March 8, 2006, 12:01AM |
 by: eon |
|
Alright... profile verification is now available. You can get to your verification page from a link inside your Control Panel on the 'Manage Pictures' page if you've uploaded at least one picture and have set a default picture and an avatar. The verification link from 'Manage Pictures' will take you to a page that will tell you all you ever wanted to know about verification and the steps to verify are well documented and easy to follow (most people who have already verified say that it was easy). Let me know if you have any questions, though if you read through everything it should be more than self explanatory. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [25 comments] |
|
| Picture Verification Tests | March 6, 2006, 2:11PM |
by: eon |
|
I need volunteers to try out the picture verification upload. Mostly this is to make sure the instructions that are given on the upload page make sense and are easy enough to follow. I don't forsee many technical difficulties, as I've tested it pretty well. If you're interested, leave a comment on my profile letting me know you'd like to help test the picture verification. Please don't leave comments here asking to help, I may or may not read them. Thanks guys.. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [7 comments] |
|
| Web Cam and Digital Camera Resolutions | February 26, 2006, 6:49PM |
by: eon |
|
In preparing for picture verifications, I need to get a feel for what kind of web cams and digital cameras the members of this site are using. If you have a cam and you understand the concept of resolution, please take the following poll: Camera Poll If you aren't sure about the resolution of your cam:
1. Take a picture and save it to your desktop. 2. Right click the picture and go to 'Properties'. 3. Click the 'Summary' tab and then the 'Advanced' button. 4. You will see a summary listing information about the pic. The first two items on the summary are width and height. "Resolution" in this poll is width x height. So if it lists a width of 640 and a height of 480 then you'd answer the poll with "640 x 480". Please do NOT comment on this article about what camera or webcam you have. If you like, comment on the poll. However, only actual poll answers are of any use. Thanks for helping out. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [1 comment] |
|
| The Eagle Has Landed | February 25, 2006, 12:33AM |
by: eon |
|
We have finally completed our move to the new server. I'm sorry that this turned into such a huge ordeal, guys. Sometimes it's hard to tell how things will go, though, and you have to sort of improvise. So that's what we did with our servers for about a week. Improvised. I believe we are now firmly planted in a rig capable of meeting the demands of our community and I'm also reasonably sure that we've seen the last of the major outages and other ultra strange, spooky events (like disappearing profiles, comments, etc.). *knocks on wood* I still have fine tuning to do and I've yet to see how this system will hold up under a heavy load, but signs are finally starting to look... reasonable. I'm in the process of getting the loose ends. LoGD will soon be back up. Mail has gone down again but will also be back up soon. Chat is now back up. As a note for our chatters, if you're used to using mIRC to connect, you'll need to update the server name to: irc.darkstarlings.com Unfortunately we didn't come through this process entirely unscathed. At one point during the move, our databases were copied to a faulty hard disk. Yes, it seemed like god, the CIA and all nine planets were aligned against me for a while there, with no shortage of heart stopping moments along the way. The faulty hard drive did some damage to our database, namely the accounts table, which was sort of cruel and ironic. I mean, why couldn't it of crapped on the hit counters, visitor lists, friend lists, block lists, ip logs or something else... anything else... that was relatively expendable? But no, the faulty drive had to take a chunk out of the big enchillada. Normally there would have been backups, but when you're in the process of migrating a large site across the internet, playing hop-scotch between networks and servers, backups aren't always a luxury that can be afforded. A small mercy, the damage wasn't major. It amounted to a handful of accounts (I'm guessing a few hundred) being dropped. If your account was dropped, you'll know because when you try to view your profile now, it will come up as not existing. You also will not be able to log in (invalid login error) and trying to retrieve your password will not work. If you are in this situation, re-create your account with exactly the same name as you had before. You can use the same email address and everything. You will get back your comments, friends lists, pictures, picture comments and layout info. Unfortunately, you'll lose anything that you had put into your sections such as about me, likes, dislikes, etc. I anticipate that some wise... people... will decide to look for dropped accounts and try to recreate them before the original owners can do so. If this happens to you, contact me. IP logs are still there, I'll be able to tell if someone swipes an account this way (and woe to you if you're caught doing so!). So, okay. I guess that about gets it. All of this ruckus derailed my plans to work on the picture verification system, but I'll get back on that one as soon as I'm able. I'll post an update about that as soon as things are sorted out. A million thanks for the abundance of understanding and patience shown by the community at large. | |
topic: Site News | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| HIM*Core | February 23, 2006, 6:08PM |
 by: VanilaScentedRomance |
|
Alright, first off a story. When HIM's CD, Deep Shadows And Brilliant Highlights came out, I bought it at my local walmart, on accident. Twas a blessing in disguise really, because from that night on, I was obsessed. I bought razorblade romance, Greatest love songs volume 666, and before they came out, I put love metal and dark light on pre order. I now own the HIM decorative flask, HIM buttons, the HIM bedspread and pillow case, three full size HIM posters, Uncountable HIM shirts, A HIM school bag, a HIM neclace, a HIM keychain, HIMs DVD with the collection of their music videos and 104 black & white 8 x 10 picture quality printed photos of Ville Valo. And right now I'm actually ordering a few more HIM items. My story, as interesting as it isnt: Since that CD purchase I have absolutely adored HIM. However there are mainly two types of people in my small gossipy town. Metal Heads/ Punk rockers, and Fake Preps. The metal heads listen to the hardest metal they can find, the punk rockers listen to the fastest most unintelligable bad reputable bands around. and The preps, anything on MTV. From my obsessions beginning, I was made fun of, i wasnt metal enough for the metal heads, not near punk enough for the rockers, and not mainstream enough for the preps. I took so much shit for liking HIM that eventually I had very few friends outside of my tight knit group. Enter the new kid. Some mexican from washington shows up with an imitation ' bamagram ' backpack. this heartagram does not have the circle around it, is far more crudely made, and stands as ville valos friend brandon margeras new symbol for most of the stuff he sells. And suddenly, everone at my school LOVES HIM! ( The new kid, and the band.) it died out after all the preps and punks realised it was not their thing, and the kid and I bonded quickly. However, his fagget was looking for someone thicker around the waist, and started dating a fat scene girl, but i digress. And the amazement continues. I was pretty shocked to see them on something other than fuse, ( which I don't get anyways, because my dad is too cheap for dish. ) and barely there. But then There they are, usually # 8 when I caught the video, HIM's new song, ' wings of a butterfly ' on fuse at my friends house. " Good for them! Finally some recognition. " but when they appear on MTV...I was lost at how to react. It was a double edged dagger through the heart. On one side I should have jumped for joy, they're mainstream, they're making bank, Go HIM! and the other, I knew that every perfect clone in a polo shirt and skirt were going to listen to them now, and soon their genius lyrics that I have worshipped from the beginning will become over used and underappreciated. I have to wonder, did Ville say all the words, and never give a thought to what they all could mean? | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [1 comment] |
|
| Radio and the Almighty Dollar | February 20, 2006, 12:57AM |
 by: Saturnalia |
|
Why does everything on the radio sound the same? Why must they play that same damn song a billion times a day? Why does it seem like the music industry is slipping into a never ending void of mediocrity? The answer is very simple and can be summed up in one word: Payola. What does "payola" mean? Essentially, it's a bribe, it's illegal and it's exactly what causes all those radio stations to churn out all that carbon-copy mediocrity day after day. Gone are the days when a DJ would get to pick and choose what was played on the radio simply on a whim. These days, radio DJ's have no power whatsoever. Everything is determined by the station program directors or station managers, who dictate to the DJ what is to be played and when, based on the play lists the director receives from the record companies. Here's how it works: The record companies are always looking to get their songs played on the radio. They figure, the more the song travels over the airwaves, the more CD's they'll sell and the more money they will make. They pick a song that they think will be a money maker and pitch it to the radio station, usually through a middleman. The radio station is offered a "promotional fee" between $1000 and $6000 for playing that one song. Eventually, this means that most of the songs on a station's play list are bought and paid for by the record companies. Then, if the record company wants the song to get played more frequently, they will give the station a little extra cash. It's all a big marketing machine. From music videos to magazines, the machine works to influence the consumer. The machine's main function is to create mindless consumer zombies who will give away all their money for a chance to own a piece of whatever they've been told is trendy/counter-culture/unique. If a programmer or DJ at a radio station refuses to work as part of the machine, then they will be replaced like any other rusty cog. This is one of the reasons why there are so many radio DJ's who engage in this activity; they don't want to be replaced. This is not to say that there aren't programmers who aren't more than happy to accept a few kickbacks from the record companies. There is nothing wrong with a radio station accepting money from a record company for playing specific songs, according to the FCC. However, it is illegal if the station does not inform its listeners that this transaction is going on, which is exactly the case most of the time. Radio stations would rather maintain the illusion that they are tirelessly searching through thousands of artists and CD's, seeking out the very best to be played on air for their listeners. Only 3 broadcast companies own over 60% of the radio stations in America, the largest of these being Clear Channel. This is mostly caused by the government back in the 1990's deregulating restrictions on media ownership, causing certain companies to create monopolies. All of these companies receive some sort of payola or another to play whatever the record company dictates. This makes for very few options for the average radio listener. The overall percentage of radio listenership has gone down in recent years. Most people are getting tired of hearing the same old shit, day in and day out. This has caused many music enthusiasts to seek out new venues for gaining access to new and original music, such as local shows, internet downloading or satellite radio. The cold fact is that a lot of music that's played on the radio these days isn't there because it's actually good quality music. It's there because someone was being greedy. It is highly unlikely that artists like Jessica Simpson, Good Charlotte and My Chemical Romance (all known to be part of the payola scandal) would have gotten so popular so fast and have as much air time as they do if it wasn't for some record executive paying off the radio stations. So the next time you're listening to your favorite radio station and you hear that same song for the millionth time, ask yourself this question: Does someone there at the station just really love this song, or is there a station manager out there somewhere buying his bratty kid a new car with the extra cash he got from selling out to a record producer? | |
topic: Current Events | |
[reply] [16 comments] |
|
| pages: back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 next |