One Life Left

Definitely the UK's favourite radio show (sort of) about videogames.

Commissioned by London’s award-winning Resonance 104.4 FM in early 2006, One Life Left was only meant to run for six episodes.

Take that, The Man because now, somewhere around one hundred and fifty episodes later, it’s in its seventh season and grown from humbling, terrified, fumbling beginnings into one of the station’s most valued shows.

Take THAT, The Man. Also take that, British radio standards.

More about One Life Left →

One Life Left – s04e05 — #77 – Illegal Alien


CD prepared? Check. Guests – or co-presenter – in studio? Check. Over-ambitious list of things to chat about? Check. Studio door locked just in case The Man tries to interrupt the maverick broadcast? Check. Memory card inserted into the memory card machine so the show can be recorded and podcast if that’s a verb? Check. Record pushed?

This show is sponsored by:

With Ste away in Japan, symptoms good ship One Life Left is left in the (dis)able(d) hands of Simon, approved Ann and guest co-host Tom BrammersMcBramwell from off of

Ste’s List Of Things To Do is largely ignored as we ramble our way through radio exclusives such as:


Then: The Phone! After all, when better to experiment with technology than when the desk is being driven by someone who’s only driven a desk once before, and that
went very badly? I know: now.

Still, it seems to go reasonably okay, until the shock twist at the end of the show, when at which point literally – literally – all seems lost.

This episode is bought to you – unedited – thanks to One Life Left best friend Spencer Lee. Who not only provides one of the show’s audio high points, but saves this episode. Literally.

Thanks Spencer. OLL salutes you. Thank him here: Thanks also to Derek, who would have been there if Spencer wasn’t.

Oh, music:
Knights of Cydonia 8bit (ripped from YouTube)
Agony theme, Psygnosis
Two listener contributions
Lemmings Rap 7inch, SFX
Commando theme, Rob Hubbard

Download the MP3 here.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.


  1. Mark says:

    Lol at the news report about a bug in Rockband.

    First time listen to O.L.L, great stuff, will subscribe to podcast on the ipod when I get home…

  2. Shinki says:

    Though there were hiccups in the show they certainly didn’t affect it hugely, you did good sir. Another great show.

  3. Sergey says:

    Thanks for playing my pedophile song… but Simon, it’s a hard ‘g’ in Sergey.

  4. Nick says:

    Very funny, well done.

  5. Poita says:

    I really like the OLL show and you all seem very nice but i have a serious complaint.

    You seem to have totally lost any sense of decency. In the middle of entertaining and civilized chat you suddenly play a song that portrays a Paedophiles fantasy as ‘deliciously evil’.
    You think a dash of humour can make anything ok but that’s pathetic. Do you have even a basic grasp of social psychology. Making something evil humorous, even ridiculing it (which you were not even doing) is a step towards rendering the thing harmless in the minds of the public. The more harmless and abhorrent a thing becomes the more acceptable it becomes. The next phase is an ever widening adoption.
    Even to ridicule Paedophiles with the real purpose of having fun by making your ridicule very humorous will in the end further the cause of Paedophiles but you were not even doing that (or the song wasn’t and by playing it, you yourselves.)
    You need to seriously take a look at yourselves and decide what kind of human being you want to be. You might think that you are decent people and that ideas and creative output etc are seperate from the way you actually conduct yourself in life but the reality is that they are not. You might think that a concept or a song is nothing to do with reality but i’m sure there are themes such as racism or gay bashing that you might take offence to.
    Wake up. I’m serious, some fundamental and important part of your moral sense is sleeping or dead (and i don’t mean moral according to some political or religious viewpoint).
    you might have some justifications for playing that song or maybe you just don’t care but you need to make a change because something is broken inside your mind and heart.

  6. AnotherSimon says:

    Hi Ann,
    DSi is really only the tip of the i-sberg. There is actually a store and a company called “iEverything”, a gore movie called “i,Zombie” (not to even mention the terrible iRobot with the even more terrible iWill Smith) and an iBrator:
    But by far the best “i” could find on the iNet is a canadian website, where you are supposed to remotely flush someones toilet. (currently its not working) It is called: iShit

  7. Andy F says:

    Hullo! I only started listening to your podcast 2 days ago and already it’s one of my favourites. Makes a nice change from all the Americans I listen to, too. Tutu. 2.

    I reckon I’ll listen live on Monday, assuming I’m not engrossed in World Of Goo or Mount & Blade.

    Also, I think you hit a nerve with Poita ^.

  8. Poita says:

    Andy what do you mean ‘hit a nerve’?

    Have i suddenly woken up in an alternative universe where songs that revel in a paedophiles attack on little girl are acceptable in the media?

    Where did I miss the several stages of moral decline that have brought us to a society where this kind of song can be calmly slipped in between light hearted banter on the video games world?

    My shock is not so much that there are sick paedophiles out there or even that emotionally and morally bankrupt people like Sergey write songs about it. It’s more that seemingly decent people like the OLL staff seem to think that this kidn of thing is not repulsive and so just play it as they would any other song.

    Describing this as ‘hitting a nerve’ with me is like describing someone as being ‘jumpy’ while they are being shot at.

  9. Mr. Chickenuts says:


    Its peoples nature to make dark jokes, geting angry about it will only ruin your day.

    Ps: Check this out

  10. Poita says:

    I think it’s simplistic to use that argument. It’s been used constantly to justify every evil act in history.
    People don’t suddenly commit genocide or rape or murder or just plain victimisation etc. They start small, just with an uncomfortable thought at first. They they devise ways of making the thought more comfortable. Humour is one way. Either way, in the end it helps them to get more and more used to the idea of something sick until actually commiting the act becomes acceptable.
    There is not true seperation between ideas and actions. They are not the same but they are linked and there is a causal relationship.
    It starts with a gleefully nasty song about raping a little girl and somewhere down the line, depite people saying “the song didn’t ’cause’ it” . . . some how it would never have got there if it hadn’t started somewhere.
    Sergey is a misguided ass but the staff of the show are fools for propagating such a themed song.

  11. iainl says:

    Sorry, Poita, but you have indeed woken up in a world where songs of the protagonist committing crimes are acceptable. Whether they be Delilah, Folsom Prison Blues or Stagger Lee there is a long and glorious tradition of telling tales of murder, abduction and all sorts of other crimes. They don’t seem to have normalised the actual performance of the acts at all.

  12. Andy F says:

    Poita, have you seen the Brass Eye paedophile episode? (or any of the Brass Eyes for that matter)

  13. Poita says:

    As usual, and sorry to say it but . . i’m confronted by a total lack of subtlty of thought when i make a point such as the one i’m making here.

    Andy, it might surprise you to know that i have indeed seen that Brass Eye episode. Maybe it would also surprise you to know that i found it hillarious and since seeing it i replay it in my mind many times as i do with all great comedy moments such as scenes from Back to the Future, Spinal Tap and ‘The life of Brian’. “Oh no, there seems to be a young boy trapped in the capsule up there in space with him, exactly what we didn’t want”. See I even kind of still have memorised (after six or so years) what i consider to be an extremely funny line.

    Now, bear with me. I want to introduce a seeminly contradictory phrase to you ‘significant subtlety’. The subtle difference between two things can render them as practical opposits, so significant an effect one subtle difference can have.

    The Brass Eye series and in particular that episode is mocking the shrill and exploitative nature of tv news and magazine shows. Morris is lambasting them for their hypocracy as they use the subject they are decrying in order to get ratings. A thinly vield ‘expose’ that is in face just more propogation of whatever subject matter they are covering.
    Just last night I saw the new South Park episode. Cartman was paranoid about the Chinese taking over America after seeing the opening ceremony to the Olympics. He dresses up in 1940’s stereotypical Chinese garb and says ‘herro prease’ alot. The American media accused Parker and Stone of racism when in fact the piece was lampooning the past use of Asian/Oriental movie stereotypes. Again, a lack of understanding of the subtlety of the show on the medias’ part.

    So, Humour, used to expose and ridicule the people and shows who don’t take paedophillia serriously and instead use it for entertainment is fine by me. Good in fact. Even Brass Eye with it’s cruel edge was intelligent and on target with that episode. Chris Morris is a dark soul but he was spot on there.

    Now, Sergeys song had no other aim, not even providing comedy, than to just be a celebration of evil. I don’t believe he was condoning Paedophillia, i think he was just using that subject matter as a way of just being as nasty as possible. Not in a Marylin Manson kind of ‘build my carreer on shocking parents and thrilling teeny wanna be goth boppers’, more of a pure delight in the taste of evil. (and i don’t mean evil in the ‘my religion sez so’ sense either)
    That doesn’t make it ok. Sergey and the staff of OLL are at best sick and at worst so bored and emotionally dead that they have to delve into evil subject matter just to feel something (kind of like the James Gandolfini character in ‘True Romance’ when he says after a while he killed people just to see their expression change’).

    Iainl. I’m a bit tired of the defense of how people don’t rush out and rape kids/kill people because they heard that song/saw a violent movie/game. The corrosive effect of such things are not instant, they slowly but surely eat away at the moral fiber of people and society (again i don’t mean religious’). Of course someone isn’t going to play manhunt then go out and kill someone with a plastic bag (well, maybe one or two out of tens of millions of players but they were probably going to do something like that anyway). But the general tone, state of mind of a people can be gradually degraded by constant exposure to not only violence but violence that creates a tone of celebrated victimisation. After all, if great culture can inspire people to want to be better than they are and to try, then can’t sick culture encourage people to do the opposite? Sure it can.
    Watching a movie about some kind of hero doesn’t turn you into one but it can inspire you to try to be a good person. Media that not only shows evil people but celebrates them can encourage dark and sick thinking in people too.
    Even a light and fun movie like ‘Pretty Woman’. Do not tell me that somewhere in the world some silly, misguided teen girls in the wrong company who were sitting on the fence about whether or not to go into prostitution didn’t see that movie and get slightly swayed by it. In some way dream about the fun, quirky fellow prostitutes like the one who was ‘sisterly’ to Julia Roberts Character. Also that as Julia said to Richard Gere “it’s only my third time” then gets whisked away ‘Officer and a Gentleman’ style to a romantic a life with a cute Billionaire.
    This kidn of stuff doesn’t make people do anything but it can add the final straw to a moral see saw.

    Sergeys song was just evil. It had no satire, comedic or social observation value. it was just a sick revelling in pure evil. If you can’t see that at least with your analytical mind, never mind your heart then your soul is in serious trouble. (and i don’t mean from judgement, just the degraded quality of it.)

  14. kerc says:

    In as much as tasteless can be funny and morbid can be dramatic personally I just thought that the song was revolting and unpleasant. I was totally enjoying the show until that point, as I have for 98% of the past two and a half seasons (sorry, late adopter, me, and the only other 2% is generally Craig who’s extremely talented but again hasn’t got a taste filter).

    I’d prefer it hadn’t have been there personally – because on second listen the Ste phone call stuff is brilliantly funny and very enjoyable and because it was neither good enough to tackle such a subject nor good enough as a chip choon in comparison to the majority of the music that’s played. Some things can bypass the taste filter if that’s the point – brasseye case in point – but the song wasn’t even cheap crass and OLL, all the way through, Simon’s maddy jokes excepted, is the most excellent slice of podcasting out there and so much better than the song that ep’ll get judged by it’s untrue.

    Must do better (although the rest of the ep was): 7/10.

    After next weeks can we download the extended edit of the apologies music? 🙂 How long does that run to anyway? Or does it infinitely loop?

  15. Poita says:

    Well it’s nice to see that I’m not the only one that objected to the song. I guess Kerc is damming with faint critisism as the fact that the song was poor and also on rotten taste is only the half of it as you an tell by my previous posts but i’m happy to see someone else standing up for decency.

    To be honest i feel a bit down after hearing that garbage on the podcast. With houswives swapping aerobics classes for pole dancing ones, kids calling girls ‘ho’s’ and ‘bitches’ becomming the norm, young girls becomming a Paris Hilton like slag in exchange for a posible 15 minutes of fame and guys aspiring to nothing more than ‘not looking weak, then this kind of evil filth being acceptable in the media . . it is starting to be driven home that, in the words of the great Leonard Coen “things are gonna slide, slide in all directions, won’t be nothin you can meassure any more”.
    Don’t look to war or crashing economy’s for indicators that civilisation is slipping into bararism . . . look to the way people treat each other on a street level and more so the way that they treat others is ignored or even egged on by the bored,emotionally dead public. The fictional 5th Ave of that song is where we are at. That’s what is now acceptable in thought, expression, media, culture and soon . . behavoir.

    I guess if you are gonna be a bit depressed about something it might as well be something as weighty as this.

  16. iainl says:

    Well, there’s a number of aspects to this I’m still not convinced on, Poita. Firstly, I think we’re taking less than a minute of the show and blowing it up into something rather larger than it is.

    Secondly, you claim that the song “had no satire, comedic or social observation value.” Which I’d definitely disagree with. The light and fluffy James Blunt/Damien Rice vocals and acoustic guitar, which is continually used in the modern Pop medium to signify what a nice person with the soul of a cute kitten the singer/songwriter is. Which is clearly intended to contrast with the revelation that the girl he’s promising sweet nothings to is underage.

    Finally, the entire piece works precisely _because_ the taboo value of paedophilia remains. We identify with the narrator, but then question our decision when the twist is revealed. Which, interestingly enough, isn’t something that happened with ‘classic’ songs like Blunt’s “You’re Beautiful” and The Police’s “Every Breath You Take” – emotive guitars appear to make the general public ignore the lyrics that show the protagonists to be rather creepy stalkers. “Delilah” has had regular airplay for 40 years, despite being told by a character who has knifed his girlfriend to death upon discovering her cheating. As far as the Government have been able to establish, Eric Clapton never did shoot a Sherriff’s deputy.

  17. Poita says:

    I appreciate your thoughts Iainl but no matter what you might be able to identify in the song that is ‘clever’ it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a direct celebration and gloryfication of paedophillia/child rape. Doing so with panache doesn’t change anything.

  18. Spencer says:

    I’m quite glad I made such a wise decision in the choice of episode to sponsor. Controversy moves my merchandise like nothing else!

  19. kerc says:

    Dang right, Spencer…

    ((until it becomes a media witchhunt and you end up stumbling around London at 3am in your nightgown with seeping wounds between your toes because you can’t handle the furore…))

    But yeah! Controversy sells.

    >Ianl: to an extent I’d agree if the song were that good or if that much thought had gone into it in the first place. Taking a pretty boy pop star and deconstructing the lyrics to show a seedier side to the personality is one thing but the song wasn’t all that was it? It was the style it was because that’s a cheap, easily imitatable style and the only thing that has us talking is the content which was socially offensive to the majority of the public (unlike Craig who says similarly offensive things regularly but has an artistic merit that at least makes things thought provoking if not palatable).

    Anyhoo: a: cheap juxtaposition isn’t social commentary, b: twists normally come at the end, rather than the beginning, c: Delilah and Every breath are great songs and humanise a taboo subject rather than glorify it and d: I think Poita’s commenting on the general lack of taste that OLL sometimes slips into as much as the Paedo song which is symptomatic of their general malaise (I think, although I may be misreading). I agree, to an extent, but the paedo song was the jump too far for me rather than something which damns the whole show. More concerning would have been if someone in the general media had got hold of it because they wouldn’t have had a leg to stand on… “Is this the next song on Guitar Hero?” screams an outraged The Scum etc etc…

    But yeah, that minute notwithstanding the show was ace and Simon was a good, if bumbling and socially unaware, host 🙂 I could hear the words Euro and Gamer a little bit too much (“hey, we’ve got a special guest!” = either Ellie or Tom) but apart from that it’s still way up there, somewhere.

    And as for Clapton… hmmm… I still have my suspicions…

  20. Poita says:

    If the hosts have read these comments at all then I’d like to ask them to think about what we have said. It’s not easy to admit that you are wrong, especially publicly. Maybe they don’t think so then at leas they get points for sticking by what they believe but i think if they reflect in a sincere enough way then they will know that they were wrong to broadcast such a song and wrong to think that it was ok as a song too.
    It’s not easy to change your mind and accept that you did something bad. We all have to do that now and again, it’s easier when you don’t have to admit it on the radio or in a forum but then again we also don’t amplify our mistakes in the first place.
    Come on hosts, there must be some part of you that is willing to forgoe at least ‘some’ of the glee of being edgy for the sake of human decency. Human decency is a priceless thing and i a little restraint and self censorship is the cost of its maintainance then that’s not too bad is it?

  21. Spencer says:

    Dearest Poita,
    Yesterday’s show contained the apology I believe you’re looking for. So we’re done with the topic, yes?

    Now let’s talk about that OTHER song last week, the one that immediately followed Sergey’s, the Zelda song in Spanish. Now THAT was controversial! Horrible! Offensive (if you are a Spanish speaker)! Butcher of sacred cows! Stupid and boring! Brought to you by the lovely sponsor!

  22. […] the console wars forever. Or it will try to do that anyway, in the same way it tries not to create epic pedo-controversy every episode. Posted in General | Trackback | | Top Of […]

  23. dbot says:

    Helloo all, I’m late to the party, but it seems there’s been a lot of confusion over the border between art and reality. It seems we’re all agreed that this is an art piece and not necessarily representative of the performer’s personal views on the subject. Is the art a reflection of society or society of the art?
    Good art gets people talking and considering the viewpoint of others, which seems to have been achieved here. In some people it will clearly strike so deep a chord that they are influenced to further action. This can be acceptance and embrace, or denial and rejection.
    The more extreme the response, the greater our insecurities, says Jung.
    So do we and society accept with a shrug, embrace wholeheartedly or wage war against the artist?
    Ask Bill Henson, Annie Leibovitz, Betsy Schneider, Agnolo Bronzino…

  24. Poita says:

    I just downloaded the latest episode so i’ll listen for the apology.

    dbot. You can intellectualise things as much as you want. Just about anything can be justified by an intellect only based argument. All you have to do is call something ‘art’ then suddenly anything is allowed.
    Also, Jung was an ass for saying that. That may be true in some cases but you cant just say that because someone is upset then they must be insecure and therefore their point is not valid.

  25. Lazerbeak says:

    I dont get its just a song, it was funny because it was sickly sweet then shocked you with the content.

    I can understand why some people might be upset about it, but hey maybe you sould be more upset about childrens homes where they let any arse work in with no proper checks.

    And kids stabing each other with knifes over a ipod.

    Making a joke about something shocking doesnt mean your a bad person. Ive made jokes about death, my race, my sexuality does this mean im homophobic, psyhopathic, racist?

    I once got very upset about a very nasty joke on another podcast (worse than the song), then I remembered something a comedian I knew once said..”Everyone finds my jokes funny, untill they hear one about something their touchy about it”, so I decided to forget about it.

    Criag the Rage has done some stuff quite frankly that make that song look like a childs joke.

    Do we now have run his work though a standards commmity to make sure it doesnt upset anyone.

  26. […] Tune in on Monday to hear what various industry luminaries had to say about the outcome. It’s not pretty. And probably unbroadcastable. But show’s a song about paedophiles and look what happened there. […]

  27. Cronan says:

    Great show, very very funny song, tender and shocking. Keep it up.

  28. dbot says:

    All you have to do is find offence in something, then suddenly freedom of speech is curtailed. You can call for apologies and banning of anything based on purely emotive response.
    For example, there is a fine line between banning holocaust denial, and promoting the benefits of subjugating colonisation (

    Neither I nor Jung suggested that because someone is upset then they must be insecure and therefore their point is not valid. I said that the desire to suppress a flaw in others can be due to the identification of the same weakness in oneself.

  29. Poita claims that Brasseye is genius because it is about the media’s portrayal of paedophilia. This contradicts his/her previous statements which suggest that any humour pertaining to paedophilia makes the thought of the crime more acceptable in the minds of potential paedophiles.

    Others have interpreted the song as a satire on pop music, making a case for the song to be treated in the same way as brass-eye.

    I have different views on the matter.

    Firstly, Brasseye was not just about the media, although stressing this aspect was an easy way for the program’s PR to pacify the outraged press. I think the episode is more about us. It is about how our insecurities, pretensions, and prejudices feed each other and eventually create this hilarious, idiotic, pretentious chimera of the modern media. And perhaps it is about something darker in people as well.

    Secondly, Brasseye pushed the envelope. It held a mirror up to society. But a consequence of its success is that ever since it has become more and more acceptable for people to make jokes about paedophilia. I am guilty of this more than anyone (making jokes, not being a paedophile). Frequently, the only humorous component of the omnipresent paedo jokes is that people are simply breaking a taboo. Of course as boundaries get pushed back, people looking for a cheap laugh have to step further to go beyond them.

    Perhaps the song was a comment on the culture of cheap paedo jokes? Maybe we have all become a bit too comfortable with joking about what is surely the most disgusting crime in our society? What next, will someone be writing a pop song a bout paedo lust?

    Or perhaps the song is no more than a cheap gag. Maybe the composer is thinking: “yeah great, let’s do a song about paedophilia, that should get us on Resonance FM! Then I might be a famous alternative pop-star one day and be mates with Pete Doherty and June Sarpong!”

    Maybe the composer wants to show how blasé we are all getting.

    I don’t think the song is a good criticism of pop though, because it doesn’t sound like commercial pop crap. It sounds more like the bedroom recorded crap people are pumping out by record store-load these days.

    Myself, I think the composer is a genuine paedophile, and should be locked in a prison with someone who will bum him.

  30. Yvonne says:

    Finally someone intelligent! Nice to meet you, Robberlobotom. So, following your logic Nabokov was a pedophile because he wrote LOLITA, Sting was a pedophile because he wrote DON”T STAND SO CLOSE TO ME and Dostoevsky was an idiot because he wrote IDIOT.

    What do we know about the songwriter? He is a free spirit who makes dark jokes about pedophilia. Oh well. Next thing he’ll write something entirely different to put a smile on Poita’s face. Something about decency as it is a big word in her vocabulary. Too bad it stands next to the word “ass”. It shows lack of class and … taste, and my list can go and on and on. I stop right here. Otherwise, I might become Poita myself, and it scares me. To live my life in black and white world, depressed and offended by a joke to a point of madness? No thank you.

    World is absurd, and art reflects it. I have noticed that only poor artists tend to moralize. Karl Jung was absolutely correct. Thank you for your brilliance, dbot.

  31. Poita says:

    poita is a guy.

    I hardly know where to start with you last few posters. It’s amazing how much you can twist and turn to arrive at the point where basicaly anything is ok.

    Oh man, yvonne doesn’t have a problem with the paedo song but the word ‘ass’ spurs her on comment a lack of class and taste? Something wrong with that picture.

    Logica and rationale very valuable but they are not everything. What can seem perfectly resonable in an intellectual discusion does not always translate into the real world. you can argue all you want about ‘tollerance’ and ‘art’ and ‘freedom’ but what is the value of any of those things if the end result is a hellish world where people sing about the joys of child rape (no matter what the angle)?

    dbot: You say you didn’t ‘say’ that people are wrong or that their point is not valid if they are upset

  32. Yvonne says:

    Poita, correct me if I am wrong but you must be taking anti-depressants to go through life without humor. Yes, this world is terrifying… and so people laugh not to cry. There is no excuse for murder, violence, porn or using the word “ass” (Junge might think I am a donkey, oh well. Yes, this word offends me coming from a preacher)

    Not trying to impose my standards or literary tastes on you, but try to be consistent. Now it is time to crucify Sting! In his song a pedophile is very warm and human. If you try to go after Nabokov, have a safe trip. He is on the other side.

  33. Anonymous says:

    You can’t judge the validity of an argument from the level of upset in the individual who states it. You can look at the argument and discard it as being incorrect, which is what I’ve done with yours.
    My quoting of Jung was to say an extreme reaction to something is often the result of a deeper insecurity, that the subject has held up a mirror to the self and you don’t like what you see. I recommend you get your mirror looked at.

  34. Yvonne says:

    Poita, everyone knows how you feel about pedophiles. Let me ask how you feel about cannibals. How about cannibals eating children? Disgusting, hah? However people keep laughing at jokes by W.C. Fields (“I like children – fried” and such).

    That explains that this passionate discussion is not about “joys of child rape” (not a single person here supports pedophilia anyway, including the songwriter). This discussion is between people who see humor in everything and people who deny dark humor the right to exist. The subject does not even matter after all. I wish you a good humorless day, Poita!

  35. Poita says:

    dbot. your point is simplistic. you take one possiblitly and go on as if that is the reasoning.
    Perhaps my so called ‘extreme’ reaction was a perfectly balanced counter to the extremety of the infraction. Anyway can say ‘your reaction was extreme so you should look in the mirror’. Sometimes dude, strong reactions are needed. They should always be in direct proportion to the thing that is being reacted to and i happen to think that a song about raping children is about as extremly evil as it gets, hence the intensity of my reaction.
    Let’s be clear here. I think we would both agree that there is a difference between an extreme ‘over’ reaction and an extreme reaction. If an extreme situation presents its self then an extreme reaction is needed.
    My Point about what Jung said is that people just use it as a blanket attack on anyone who has an extreme reaction which is what i think you did. I have a regular habit of looking into the mirror dude dont’ worry about that. I’m a strong believer in running a psychological self diagnosis (i.e. looking into the mirror). I’m such a believer in this that i even take steps to counter the one problem in that which is that we all have a blind spot. Knowledge of that blind spot is the first step to seeing past it which is done by regularly asking friends to point out crap that you yourself are blind to then respecting their agragated consensus and taking steps, based on faith in their assesment, to make adjustments. Believe me dude, I am not a self indulgent person who just worships his own emotions. I beleive in identifying a absolute standard of morality/decency and making an effort to conform to that whether it’s painful or not to admit weakness/bad points etc.
    The flip side of what Jung pointed out is also true. people who don’t have an extreme reactin when an extreme situatin arises also have some serious soul searching to do an some of you guys certainly fall into that category.

    yvone, I won’t spend too much time with you as your comments show a lack of an ability to think in a deep or subtle way. dbot, although we don’t agree, has a somewhat sophisticated thought process.
    I’m not on antidepressants. I also don’t smoke, drink or take drugs. Not because im morally against them, i just think that there is ample opportunity to get high on the chemical that my brain can produce. The human brain is an electro-chemical plant that . . . (unlike drug companies with there 2,000 subject/5 year case study concept to market process) . . . has evolved over 2 billion years with thousands of trillions (litterally) of subjects. The brain knows exactly when, how much and for how long and which type of drug to give you to put you in a state of bliss. We have to earn it by ‘indirect’ activity. I happen to think that constant use of ‘direct’ shortcuts such as alcahol/pot etc to feel good and medication to stop feeling bad is about as retarded and clumbsy way as you can imagine to ‘adjust’ ones self.
    Now, onto your point.
    you seem to be under the delusion that sergey wrote this song to make himself and others laugh so he didnt have to cry. It’s clear from the tone of the song that this is not the case. I have already stated that I can analyse his mentality enough to guess that he does not support or practice paedophillia, that he produced this song as a way of feeling evil glee at the rise he will get from other peoples reaction to it. Actually that is more evil to me than if here were a sick paedophile. The worst thing of all is healthy minded people who delight in evil. Truly sick and twisted people at least have the exuse of a distorted mind. So if i’m right and sergey isn’t a paedophile then what he did is even worse.
    People have tried to say that he did it as a ‘comment’ on the sickly sweet/pseudo innocence of some of todays ‘Mmm bop’ style pop songs. I doubt that is the case, even if it was there is something sick about the ‘Barney the dinosour hating crowd.’ Why do you think that certain people dispise innocent fare aimed at innocent kids? It’s because the hate innocence its self. I know because to a certain extent i was like that myself. I spent some time in a foster home when i was about 14yo aflter languishing in a childrens home since age 2. Having such a frozen heart i found it totally sickening to see the fosterparents give their kids hugs and kisses before sending them off to bed. I actually felt sick at the sight of it. I eventualy grew out of that but i learned that people who frozen hearts find such innocence to be sickening. It’s a kind of evil and brings up feelings of hatred for such people and things and a desire to have the hell of your own life and expereince poured upon them. You can see such in almost every sketch that Chris Morris writes, especially in his serries ‘Jam’.
    So, Yvonne, Sergey had no bitter sweet, tragicomedy reason for writing this song. He just delights in the most sickening and evil subject matter possible. Also, he and his predictably pathetic marylin manson ilk find a kind of ‘hoodie’ like empowerment in shocking and disgusting others. Such a desire for empowerment only illustrates their own fear and weakness.

    Believe it or not i’m a very humorous person. I even like racey homour and often shock my friends by going a bit too far. I’m not comming at you from the point of view of a fuddy duddy but even a person who likes humour, even shocking humour has to have some standards. Humour does not make anything ok. Humour can be acceptable in the right way but it’s not a passport to crap anywhere you want.
    It’s time to wake up and grow up.

  36. Yvonne says:

    “i just think that there is ample opportunity to get high on the chemical that my brain can produce”.

    – all right, you find great delight in your mental power. You claim to get high on the chemical produce of your brain. Doesn’t it cloud your judgment? You call Jung an “ass” and Yvonne lacking subtlety and depth… Well, I love Jung (the mystic in him).

    Maybe you just need to feel better about yourself therefore all these postings and judgmental attitude? In this way, dear Poita, you are simply asking for attention (while accusing the songwriter of the same) I am kind but this is not the right place.

    I read carefully your post but oddly enough I feel more kindness in Sergey’s work than in your scribblings. I trust my intuition, and I do not see Light or Goodness in you. Maybe you are too angry right now. Think happy thoughts and let this case rest, pedophiles rot and the songwriter come up with more happy tunes on many more subjects…

    Too much hate even for a good reason has ruined great nations. Lighten up just a little bit more!

  37. Poita says:

    yvonne your post isn’t actually about anything. It’s just one of those replys that people make where instead of talking about the points they just try to sound condescending in an effort to create a sense that they have achieved the moral/mental high ground.
    Being condecending and using prase like ‘dear Peter’ and stating that someone who stands for something (so therefore against something) are full of hate isn’t a conversation/debate, it’s just you giving up and lowering yourself to insult based discussion.

    Didn’t you understand my comment about getting high on ones own brain chemicals? How did you interpret that as meaning that a person feels great by being smart? I was talking about exercise, work, study, forging relatinships, accomplishments and all the other things in life that can bring joy. Even eating, sleeping, reading playing games etc. All induce the brain to produce chemicals that give you a high. All natural and don’t harm you in anyway. Being smart and feeling good about intellectual achievements are only a small part of life.

    Somehow no matter how long this conversation goes on it always arrives at the point where some of you guys are saying that songs of men raping little girls are ok and Me saying they’re not.

    Yvonne take it easy. You seem to have developed a talent for condescension but you are out of your league when it comes to deep, intelligent and especially rational debate.

  38. dbot says:

    Oh Peter, you festering boil of inconsistent, hypocritical, odious pomposity.

    You deride one person for intellectualising only to later criticise them for simplifying.
    You revel in your own superior intelligence but still demonstrate a startling lack of self awareness when condescending while rebuking another for the same.
    You exalt the pleasures of the chemical highs from everyday experiences yet maintain you do not worship your own emotions, caused by those very neurochemicals.

    You have clearly confused art with the artist, in a manner that would be offensive to many.
    You have clearly chosen one artwork, from a selection of many far more prevalent in society, against which to make your self-aggrandising stand.
    You have justified your opinions using a moral sense derived an ancient work of literature.
    One that sings in the Song of Solomon about marrying off pre-pubescents;&version=9; and killing them if they put out.
    One that supposes a man who fathered his own grandchildren;&version=9; is a virtuous man;&version=9;
    One that proposes you kill the enemy, barring the girls;&version=9; but then suggests you imprison them and make them your wife;&version=9;

    You have been unnecessarily and directly personal in your criticisms of others trying to voice their opinions. How do you like it?

  39. Yvonne says:

    “yvonne your post isn’t actually about anything”.

    – Right, it is about you. I do not talk in circles like you do. We have already determined why you are here: to degrade everyone who disagrees with you. No wonder you get same reaction back. I should not fall that low though. It does put me in the same league with you, and this is my worst nightmare. No matter how hard you try to hurt the songwriter, myself and others, you do not do it out of love for little girls. You do it because you want to get high on your brain power…or whatever. If you really wish to improve the world, you would bring Light and Joy, not hatred and hurt. So again, Lighten Up Just a Little Bit More! Good bye, dear Poita and enjoy your own company. Nobody else can.

  40. Ste ste says:

    And that, listeners and beautiful friends, will do. There’s a new episode AND a post by Craig to comment on. Further pedogate-related replies here will be DESTROYED somehow with technolgy and such.

  41. Sergey says:

    What have I done!

  42. Kay Chung says:

    You’ve done it once again. Amazing article!

Leave a Reply