You go off to give a talk on hedgehog gene expression in teratomas, or something similarly scientific. You put the memory stick in the auditorium display projector, the A/V guy pushes a button, and all of a sudden, the audience gets a brief glimpse of that unholy quantity of squid close-up photography you keep around for personal reasons. Now it’s never happened to me, personally — I’m competent with a computer, and much more careful — but here’s a story of a man who ‘accidentally’ showed the wrong powerpoint presentation.
In this case, the man was a Catholic priest (oooh, now you know exactly what happened next, right?)
And it wasn’t a zoology exercise on display. It was, as they delicately put it, “indecent images of men”.
I’m confused by one thing. On the one hand, they say the flustered priest quickly removed the memory stick and fled the room; on the other, the parents and children present report quite specifically that there were 16 pictures shown. I’m thinking it must have been a particularly vivid montage. Although the parents found it impressively memorable, the priest, Martin McVeigh, said he had no knowledge of it. Hmmm.
I am a little amused by what happened afterwards.
Twenty minutes later he returned, he continued with the meeting and wrapped up by saying that the children get lots of money for their Holy Communion and should consider giving some of it to the church.
That’s so typical of a Catholic priest: first they waggle a pile of penises at your kids, then they ask you to fill their coffers. Those priests better look like Chippendales dancers, or they shouldn’t get a penny.
I haven’t found any reports on how persuasive the audience found the presentation.
Boy, how do recover from a boner like that?
At least he puts his pictures right up front on his flash drive, on auto-run. Me, I am the dishonest type who hides it down a layer or three in a sub-folder, like Data -> Images -> Sorting -> Scrap -> Filth and Degradation.
What a maroon.
I can’t imagine screwing up that badly but yeah, it’s good practice to show up to your presentation early and test out the UI and make sure you have the right content for the talk (and that it’s all plugged in).
How do you see 16 pictures of anything when the memory stick is removed quickly? Was it 1 picture made up of 16 separate pictures? And how can they say no crime was committed?
Boy, how do recover from a boner like that?
He seems to be going with the “deny everything” route. Personally, I’d at least try to claim that it was my own fault for leaving my flash drive out in public on April Fool’s Day or something like that, rather than just a bald denial.
Another priest who belives “spare the rod and spoil the child.”
That’s why I’m no longer a priest.
Of course that was all atheist porn instead.
Glen Davidson
PZ:
Sounds more like gross anatomy.
Kevin Alexander:
I see what you did there.
Also, am I the only one who’s surprised that the photos were of men, not children?
He put them in powerpoint????
Or they showed up some other way?
When I do presentations using a memory stick, I always make sure that the presentation is the only thing on the stick just to avoid having to stand there and read through all the files to find the right one. I never even thought about a problem like that.
Maybe he thinks he’s a Jedi. “These are not the pics you are looking for.”
He has no knowledge of the imagery ? Imagery from his memory stick ? And although he fled the room flustered ?
Whatever happened to those fine upstanding morally superior Christians we are always told exist ?
Ah, that’s right, they don’t.
I think @2 may be right, and the images were in the top directory of the stick, with the presentation.
I hope they stiffed him.
Twenty minutes works for me too.
We’ve been telling them for years that the pull-out method isn’t that effective.
What a screw-up! A cooler customer would have used it as an ice-breaker. Just a joke. Ha ha. Really. After all, it was a first communion class, which is all about eating Jesus. I’m sure the parents would have been most amused by the aptness of it. I mean, they seem ready to believe just about anything. (And did the priest remember to say “April Fool”?)
This coverage of the event has these two seemingly contradictory quotes:
“The priest has stated that he had no knowledge of the offending imagery.” and
“I don’t know how it happened”.
If he doesn’t know how it happened, how can he unequivocally state that there is a “legitimate” explanation?
Jeez, they’re even bad at lying. “It was for a presentation to other priests about the dangers of the internet and the horrible things parishioners can find there.” See? Easy.
You could not make it up could ya?
If, by some quirk of cosmic destiny, it was a ‘practical joke’ …or a typical RC fuck up royal,the presumed cock admirer did not even have the common courtesy or even display the wit of uttering a trite…
“sorry folks…someone is having a very sick prank at my expense and as such proves that the Roman Catholic Church is under attack by Satan”
Nope…he panicked…grabbed the memory stick and fled the scene as any fucking guilty coward of sexually confused and damaged priest would do…without even an attempt at any comment apparently.
And no criminality committed ?…surely displaying porno shots of said hunks in front of a crowd that were expecting pink and fluffy jeebussy inspired piccies but instead were treated to pink and fluffy summat else, is verging on the dissemination and display of pornographic images on the general public without their permission at the very least?
It is about as crude as it gets.
The priest has some very searching questions and a computer that loaded the stick to analyze at the very least.
But of course a cat’o’lik’ copper might shit himself about hell fire and damnation, or his superiors, either way,this seems like ‘normal’ RC priests behaving like ‘normal’ RC priests…no shocker there methinks!
That must be it Carlie. I, for one, was certainly unaware that there was porn, gay or otherwise, on the internet. To make sure I understand the dangers completely, I think everyone should post links to the most
explicitdangerous porn sites for me.Oh, great. From the article:
“I’ll hold up the rug, Father. You sweep under it.”
Please collect your truckload of sniny new Internets at your convenience.
I thought that was the problem. No coverage.
Since when does the Roman Catholic church get to decide whether a crime has been committed or not?
There is no mention of calling the police.
Hey, I’m not even on the same continent.
Carlie, #16,
LOL yeah!
“And here, brothers are some of the terrible, terrible things one can find on the internet. Look for example at the cock on this donkey and what that gentleman is doing to it. This image depicts a disgusting and degrading act. Here it is from another angle.”
“And another”
“And another”
“And here’s a different donkey”
“And here is a picture of a young man resting his rather remarkable genitals on a bicycle. I call this ‘The Raleigh Chopper.'”
“And this young lady is pleasurably engaging in some consensual sex…oh, no one interested in that one, okay no problem, personally that one is the most disgusting. So here’s a semi naked altar boy I prepared last week to cheer us up after that nasty image.”
I’m always suspicious of these things. Call me an old cynic. It’s like those archaeologists/anthropologists that have statues with massive penises in their offices and refer to them as “a very significant find” with a little too much “creepy uncle style” enthusiasm.
Louis
It was a presentation on the Communion and the body of Jesus actually showed itself in the flesh instead of symbolically.
I would not be surprised to learn that, during his 20 minute absence, he went and confessed every last detail, thereby putting the whole matter outside the jurisprudence of civil law. That way if he was charged with anything, he could smile smugly and say, “That is a matter between me and my confessor; you’ll have to take it up with the Holy Father in Rome to get an exeption to the Seal of the Confessional.”
I suppose it’s technically possible that someone else loaded the images as a nasty joke or to slander priests…ouch! I think I just threw my back out bending over backwards to give him the benefit of the doubt.
From PZ’s link;
And yet;
The funny part is that he thinks that this kind of blanket denial is going to work. It is rather like a child being caught with their hand in the cookie jar, who then says that their sibling did it… while their hand is still in the cookie jar.
Honestly, this guy makes ‘but teacher, the dog ate my homework’ look like a masterwork of flawless deception.
That would be the same kind of ‘investigation’ the church performed into clerical child rape, I take it?
—————————————————————-
Ms. Daisy Cutter, Gynofascist in a Spiffy Hugo Boss Uniform @ 8:
When I started reading PZ’s post and got to the part about a Catholic priest, I was absolutely certain that this was going to be a horror story about child pornography.
It was nice to be pleasantly surprised for once; at least this god botherer was lusting after adult men (that one hopes were fully consenting professionals of their trade).
—————————————————————-
Brownian @ 13;
Brilliant. No wonder the ghey secks with Brownian line is so long, and getting longer everyday.
Perhaps if Father Martin McVeigh was less of a hypocrit about his sexuality, her might also wish to apply to join…
Whut? Must we criminalise someone for such a pornographic cockup?
I think it would be safe to say that the embarassment caused to the man, along with any professional consequences, should be sufficient punishment in this case. (I am not aware that the images were apparently of anything other than gay porn.) Save the criminal charges for the child abusers in the RCC (we wish!), rather than merely IT-incompetent consumers of titillating imagery.
This man, presuming he isn’t some sort of pervert who enjoyed flashing porn at children, did little more than drop a giant social and professional clanger.
However, I would like to point out that this man is likely to suffer additional opprobrium if this was gay pornography rather than its straight counterpart. Perhaps for that he deserves additional sympathy.
Um. . . someone send that priest a tutorial on how to hide/unhide folders. It wouldn’t save him from a real police investigation, but it certainly would save him from accidentally showing his porn stash.
More sort of relieved.
Now which powerpoint should I upload to this USB flash drive? catholic_dogma.ppt or penis_overload.ppt? Hmm… Help me to decide, Jeebus!
Just a litle editing to my last post. I have no idea where that rogue ‘r’ came from.
Heh-heh. You must be new ’round this planet, stranger.
Am I the only one who feels sorry for the guy? Sold a bill of goods that not only are “impure thoughts” sinful, but same-sex ones are an abomination, and suddenly everyone sees your deepest secret laid bare? I just want to tell the guy to quit his job telling lies to kids and fleecing the flock, take a long vacation, and come back ready to live out in the open with some other fellow who will make him happy.
I don’t see the difference.
Nope. And maybe I’m missing some details, but I don’t think the fellow needs to be criminally charged for an embarrassing—but ultimately probably not harmful to anyone but him—mistake, as Bernard Bumner wrote.
Clamouring that a crime has been committed smacks of “OMG! Nudity is worse than anything (but violence is okay)!” Puritanism.
Awash in all the other shit the RCC does, we tend to forget that the clerical life of celibacy and repression isn’t all that healthy for the nuns and priests, either.
Ibis,
No you’re not the only one who feels sorry for him. Mind you, the feeling sorry for him does get in the way of the pointing and laughing. Which given that he’s a Catholic priest, is kinda fun.
I know that makes me a bad person.
You are right though. This dogma and system harms the priests too. Not all of them (or even a majority) are paedophiles or evil people. A lot of them are decent people trying to do something they think is good. It must be a nightmare for people like him to live a deeply inauthentic life, and yes, as long as he has not harmed anyone (beyond the usual harm such things and people do) then he has some of my sympathy.
That sympathy is tempered with the fact that he props up, and likely preaches the message of, an organisation that condemns in horrendously bigoted terms the sexual expression he supposedly likes (apparently adult homosexuality).
Louis
Now if the priest had been thinking he would apologised and said that was the last time he was going to let the Cardinal use his laptop.
Louis:
Oh, the priest could have worked that into a reading from Ezekiel.
No, you are absolutely right. It can’t be easy to be a member of such a violently repressive, anti-sex club if you are sexual.
Pranks are at least a possibility. From my High School days in the predigital era: The chemistry classroom had a number of pull down charts and one semester someone taped a Playboy foldout over the center of the atomic chart of the elements. When it was pulled down during the first lecture much hilarity ensued. Geek humor, perhaps, but it was the talk of the school for at least a week.
More like, “These are not the pics you’re looking at.”
–
At the risk of being shunned forevermore, I gotta say: Don’t tar them all with the same brush. I know a good many fine, upstanding, fully-existent Christians who are arguably morally superior (subject to definition of “moral” and “superior”, of course) to some atheists. And some other Christians, of course, as well as people whose stance on religion is unknown to me.
–
Me, too.
–
wut.
how is being accidentally exposed to porn criminal? I mean, if it were, we’d have to outlaw all of the internet, as well as all kiosks that sell magazines with uncovered boobs on them.
The priest is so obviously not to blame for this bit of indiscretion. It is the fault of the permissive attitudes of the 1960’s.
I suppose that I would expect an immediate response of incandescent rage followed by an immediate witchhunt if that were the case. Denial would be less surprising if someone knew that they had just made an enormous mistake.
Perhaps that narrative just plays to the caricature I hold of RCC priests?
Anyway, what should be a story of someone inadvertently displaying pornographic images, is – a quick search of social media tells me – turning into the story of a homosexual displaying homosexual images to children. This is apparently worse.
Whatever the real explanation, I suspect that a tide of righteous indignation is just about to overwhelm the rational voices. (Unless a scapegoat can be quickly located and suitably sacrificed in a bloody manner.)
I also wondered about the 16 pictures when I first read this, and then I got the image of the priest rapidly clicking on the next picture, and then the next, and then the next, before eventually doing his exit.
Funny, but I think the cardinal rule for churchy organisations is “protect the higher ups at all costs”.
Please ignore this suggestion, it’s a crappy suggestion, nothing to see here, move along now.
Pssst, DLC, don’t go spoiling peoples fun now. ;)
Regardless of intent, they should come clean. If it was an accident, there’s nothing wrong in saying so and moving on. Trying to cover it up only makes it look like they have something to hide. (I’m assuming now the people in those shots were of legal age, but you can’t be too sure.)
PuffPo has this juicy quote: “I don’t know how it happened. There are people making innuendoes who weren’t even there, but in this day and age these stories grow.”
People were apparently so much less credulous 2,000 years ago.
I have a technical question. This memory stick that the professor speaks of…… I’m currently working on a music/comedy project that I would like to incorporate pics and video into. Is there a software program for this? Any A/V folks here that could help?
I can totally see why he needed to come back begging for money. Poor man can’t afford a thumb drive of his own for personal use. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW POOR THAT IS?!?!?! This man is so Godly he can’t find $20 to take precautions against blasting everyone with his porn stash.
I had no idea that the correct nomenclature for a group of penises was “a pile”.
@28 Gregory Greenwood – actually these blanket denials work for them ALL the time. They flatly say things that are obviously untrue ALL the time. Americans buy that crap ALL the time.
If only we could show sequences of statements and actions to delegitimize these guys. But they’re followers don’t work like that and we all know it. Think about lots of data and make a decision based on that or have the appropriate authoritarian man what to think. We all know which option they pick. Thinking is hard work, man.
@29 – he flashed pornographic images in front of children. You have zero problem with that?
Rev. BDC, The Oatmeal tells me it’s actually “a bucket.”
Sympathy for the man’s embarrassment, perhaps, but I’m less sympathetic for hypocrites. Do remember that he represents an institution that routinely castigates against such “moral indecency” as this. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the good father has railed against pornography, homosexuality, and other sexual “corruptions” from the pulpit any number of times. As for criminal charges, this probably doesn’t constitute a crime, but don’t forget that there are people in jail and on sex offender roles for little more than what this man, or someone in his organization, has apparently done…get caught downloading naughty pictures.
I, for one, am not. I think one of the attractions of joining an order of single, unattached, celibate men, be they Augustinians, Christian Brothers, monks, Jesuits, what have you, is that they are an order of single, unattached, celibate men.
I’ve known so-called holy men who were gay. It’s one way of suppressing your same sex attraction by joining groups comprised of …ummm…members of the same sex.
Or so they tell themselves.
I’ve heard “a bag of dicks” but never “a pile of penises”.
And a bucket?
Well that’s just silly.
FYI, problematic != criminal
The Father has announced that he is “going to kill that bloody bastard with the green clarinet”
What do we use for vulvas; a vat?
I mean vulva is the only one unclear to me. All others are obvious. Sack of testicles for example.
from the linked article:
How does that get to be “pornographic”. The RC parents may consider naked bums to be “indecent”.
A vault of vulvas
In my opinion, the prank is quite probable. At least, if I found an unattended flash drive belonging to a priest, gay porn would be the first thing I’d put on it; and April the 1st was dangerously close to the event…
Brownian 13:
Brag, brag, brag.
Maybe ‘an internet of vulvas.’
Glen Davidson
Perhaps any Catholic theologians here taking a break from ‘doing research on the internet’ could help me out.
Would it be better or worse, according to Catholic teaching, if the gay men fucking in those pictures were married to each other?
Brownian is on a roll in this thread! I have to admit to a fit of schadenfreude giggling when I first read this story. The priest’s reaction to it makes his denials ring hollow.
I, too, believe that penises associate in bags. They are often salted, and usually go by the nickname “Dick.” This sounds like a wholesome and delicious snack, but apparently this is not the case. I must admit that I know little of vulvas, neither singularly nor in groups.
@39: OK, that made my mind free-associate a double-entendre on “laptop”, and generate an image of two gents in clerical garb doing something most unholy (well, by the tenets of that religion at least).
“sack of testicles”
I may have to switch from Brownian’s line to Ing’s line.
———
Count me with the folks at least somewhat sympathetic to the guy (assuming that the images were of consenting, adult persons).
Doe he, in his role as a priest, contribute to the support of an organization that does untold harm?
Yes. So does my mother.
Getting otherwise good people to realize that they may be ignorantly contributing to evil is difficult. It’s compounded by the reality that some level of such may be unavoidable. For many years I worked for a company that was (and still is) owned by News Corp, and as such, yes, I was in my small way helping to fill the coffers of Rupert Murdoch. I’m glad I don’t work there anymore, but frankly, that wasn’t the reason I left. (I left because I got a better job elsewhere. That my current employer is less morally objectionable is a bonus.)
Imagine if you lived your whole life drinking the Kool-aid so deep that you felt called to become a priest. You are now steeping in piles of rationalization to justify turning a blind eye to the piles of rot and corruption above you. You’re being told that someone else is handling it, and you should go on with tending your congregation and trying to make their lives better.
Suppose you start to realize that no, the shit is really, really bad. There are two ways to go: First is to say, “Yeah, I can’t be a part of this anymore,” and get out. Second is to double-down on the denial and cling even more tightly to your delusion that all is well. That second option comes with the bonus that you don’t have to admit to yourself that you’ve been complicit in evil for years and years.
People who use their position to abuse others are scum.
People who have wandered into a situation that is morally untenable and are now doing mental gymnastics to protect their psyche are human. If their primary sources of information and psychological counseling are also part of the corrupt system, how the hell can they get out?
I hope there’s a ex-clergy support group of some sort.
@70: I think that’s like asking whether it makes it unkosher to put a slice of Swiss your ham sandwich.
I’m guessing it popped up a directory view with preview icons enabled. 4×4 array of smut.
So let me get this straight. A substitute teacher who tries to use a classroom computer to show a presentation, but malware causes porn to pop up, that SUB is charged for exposing children to pornography.
But a priest using his own equipment can flash porn in front of children whenever they want. Even if it wasn’t his porn, that porn on the computer in the classroom didn’t belong to the sub.
^”Swiss on your ham sandwich”. Damn.
@74: Dennett and LaScola have on-line site called The Clergy Project for clergy who have lost their faith and are struggling with how to make an exit that doesn’t destroy them socially and financially. A few of their alums were at the AA Convention in DC last weekend, telling some very moving stories.
@61 – tell that to the sub in my post at 77.
What if the computer is set to “show all hidden folders”?
St Francis of Assisi is said to have once thrown himself into the snow naked, both heads first, to help with the repression.
Who sat there and counted? 16 is an awfully specific number (and I would have been too busy giggling).
What porn?
It is the same line!
My guess is folder->settings->display as thumbnails 4X4 grid
If one person is mistreated we are not obligated to screw over other people simply out of fairness.
@83 – if it is what the law calls for, we usually call that “Equal Protection” Usually it is those guys who want to have special rules for themselves. But if you want to do so too, I suppose why not?
The article mentions several times that no crime was committed. Have they verified that the images were not copyrighted? They could on the hook for tens of thousands of dollars.
Yes that’s exactly what I said. Good job with your reading. I politely refuse your invitation to join you in a pointless barrage of belligerent comments followed by my snarky responses dripping in either impatience or barely contained resentment.
@78
I didn’t notice until you corrected it. The brain is a lovely, self correcting organ, in’it?
@84: You’re aware that the teacher case and this current priest incident took place in different countries, right?
Random question, targeted to people calling for legal action here. If Ted Haggard was caught in a state that at the time had anti-sodomy laws and had charges pressed would you support those charges?
Doesn’t matter. If one person is charged with blasphemy we must charge everyone with it or else we’re being unfair to the first person we fucked over. It’s the punitive justice system, make nothing better and just hurt more people.
fastlane @ 71
“The priest’s reaction to it makes his denials ring hollow.”
Under a stressful situation…a true representation of character can be revealed.
Realizing that your fav porn shots were now under public scrutiny neatly slots into that observation.
Realizing someone has played a sick joke on you also slots into that observation.
But it is all in the reaction…a priest is supposed to be socially aware.
After all they all seem to think they are the great manipulators amongst the sheeple and psychology modules would…I suggest would not be a strange thing in seminary being such a valuable tool in their armory to brow beat the masses…but this one either through guilt or incompetence screwed up …not in possibly revealing a sexual side to his spirituality but is deserting his flock where one might think they would like some reassurance or at least an explanation the most…even if it was a typical flimsy RC lie…sheeple are used to them!
If an accident or prank then possibly a criminal charge is inappropriate, but his reaction appears to suggest a guilt ridden and embarrassed ‘crow’ that high tailed out of there after grabbing the stick..,a singular act of gross incompetence.
Mind you being a RC priest these days must be tantamount to a criminal act…if not intent!
@ chrispollard #22 (& Bronian #34)
“Since when does the Roman Catholic church get to decide whether a crime has been committed or not?
There is no mention of calling the police.”
According to the article:
“The archdiocese immediately sought the advice of the PSNI who indicated that, on the basis of the evidence available, no crime had been committed”
The PSNI is the Police Service of Northern Ireland (formerly the Royal Ulster Constabulary) – a body not known for being pally with Catholics.
I would have been too busy yelling “what the hell?” and would have followed that with the question, “are those dicks?“
I’m a scientist. I would have asked, “Are those penises?”
Except, as a scientist, I would have known that they were.
To be fair, some people already know what dicks look like, so they’d have had extra time for counting while you were working your way through question 2.
I’m a smartass. I would have responded with “No, they’re penes.”
Ing,
Herp a derp. I should have figured that out.
(Although I still would have been too busy giggling to realize how many pictures were displayed.)
PZ,
Not that non-scientists can spot a penis (or 16), right? :p
Or maybe it was one picture of a man with 16 penises?
Brownian has an edge. I’ve never had to deal with a plurality of penes before.
@98, @99: Centauri porn? (ie: B5)
I count my penes just like everyone else does: one at a time.
(Unless they’re arrayed in a matrix, in which I multiply the rows by the columns, but I don’t expect everyone to be familiar with such advanced dicking around.)
Oh, c’mon. I would have known what they were. But I would have asked anyway. You know, rhetorical question.
Also, I’m kind of a jerk.
PZ:
Tsk! You’re missing out.
The other day I was walking to the train station and I was caught short and desperate for a widdle. I noticed the fence next to me had a knot hole in it at just the right height, and since this was a secluded route to the station I decided to pop my old chap through the hole and have a pee. People would just think I was looking at the garden or something.
As soon as I’d popped my cock through the hole, I felt someone grab a hold of my John Thomas, and worse, now I couldn’t get the bugger back out through the hole.
I looked over the fence to see three young boys who had put a jubilee clip over the end of my cock, locking it in the hole. The first boy said to me “You better give us ten pounds mister, or we’ll cut your cock off!”.
“Shit!” I thought, “I better try and negotiate myself out of this position.”. So I said to the young man who had spoken up
“Well aren’t you an enterprising young man, how much money have you made this week?” to which he replied
“Two hundred and thirty pounds” which I thought was bloody good.
I said to the second young man “Now, how much have you made my lad?” and he replied
“Ninety pounds” which was still pretty bloody good.
So I said to the last lad, the youngest of the three “And you my boy, how much have you made?” and he said
“Nothing”
“Nothing?” I asked surprised.
“No, sir, not a penny, but I’ve got a bucket full of cocks!”
Louis
P.S. This is a true* story.
* For certain values of “true”. Values associated with creationism.
For all we know, these “indecent” photos are of shirtless guys.
True. Which is why one should always wear a condom to avoid having one’s penis spotted, regardless of the education or profession of one’s partner.
According to the BBC story, he incident occurred on March 26th, not April 1st, which somewhat argues against the “April Fools’ Day prank” hypothesis. The prank theory is plausible, but the simple theory is the guy picked up the wrong memory stick on his way to the lecture.
Also, is April Fools’ Day celebrated in Ireland, and if so how? The practice varies from country to country.
@frog —
As I said, sympathy for the human, perhaps, but I’m not sympathetic for the priest. I doubt your mother is in the same position of authority as the priest and the church not only to support prudishness in the community, but pressure public officials into implementing penal codes that put people in jail for doing essentially the same thing.
And now in my mind we’ve connected the Squildo post to this one.
Ing:
Oh, fuck you for making me Google this.
(Seriously, you prolly don’t wanna click that if you’re at work.)
That’s a pile of penises right there
“Oh, yeah. Dicks. I’ve seen, like, a million of ’em. But maybe we’d better take a look at those photos…to make sure you know what they look like.”
You don’t need to put your guard up with us, feralboy12.
I think women are allowed to ask men to marry them, or something like that.
Today’s Song for Brownian.
Mmmmmwah!
Louis
Is this the song for a world renowned IT polymath I wonder?
Louis
Well if it’s like the US all sources of information and news and social media temporarily become unusable as grown adults start acting like fucking children and making people who actually want to continue on and live their day as normal absolutely miserable and unproductive.
Anyone want to bet that he’ll get in trouble for this with the Church authorities only because those were pictures of men, not boys?
Collective noun for penises?
A proud (it’s a bit like a pride) of penises?
…So did they throw the USB stick out or just move it to a new harddrive?
Ah, the “pretend it never happened” strategy. How… Catholic.
That’s because of the Ghey Secks line.
;)
–
Ing 118: And a sniny internet to you.
Yep, April Fool’s Day is celebrated here, but only up to noon. If you try to fool someone after 12, “the fool’s on you”.
Women asking men to marry them is a different tradition: that’s the 29th of February.
TRiG.
and wrongly so, because the US has fucking ridiculous laws and paranoid enforcers on the topics of schools and of sex. Why should we encourage other countries to go down that road, too?
It’s called a “flash drive” for a reason.
@107:
Valid distinction.
My sympathy is with the human man inside the collar. My sympathy stops at the moment he returns to the room and suggests that children should donate part of their first communion gift-money to the church.
On the plus side, there’s a big case here in Philly against a couple of Catholic clergy who covered up sex abuse. The reports in the news have been incompetent–I can’t tell who is accused of what–but there are definitely priests on trial, and it’s definitely related to assaults that took place 40+ years ago.
Since possession of a penis is a requirement to become a Catholic priest, probably Fr. McVeigh had been checking the credentials of candidates for the priesthood. It’s all perfectly innocent, except for those of us with our minds in the gutter.
The depts of depravity in the Catholic Church: Now it is Powerpoint? Evil fuckers.
And who the hell puts their porn into a Powerpoint presentation?
It wasn’t his original intention, but then Clippy popped up and said, “you appear to be jerking off. Would you like some help?”
Feralboy owes me a new keyboard.
Don’t accept help from Clippy. He’ll shove his tip up your tip and it won’t be pretty.
Or does he do that when you don’t accept his help? I forget.
When I wrote,
What I actually meant to write was,
For some reason the letters on my keyboard jammed, producing the incoherent nonsense I originally posted in 29. I must learn to use the preview button. Or something.
Is an absurd idea. A meeting between the Principal and IT support to remedy the malware problem would be much more appropriate and useful. This should probably be followed by a letter of explanation and reassurance to parents, including an institutional apology but offering support to the teacher.
Exposure to pornography is obviously potentially damaging to children, but teaching them to overreact to accidents and incidents by lashing out at the unwitting or incompetent is also not a healthy lesson.
I’m rather not surprised, though I’m concerned about the lack of tentacles…
It probably was not a Powerpoint. He had Windows set to “Autoplay,” which you can find in your Control Panel. His was set to Pictures | View Pictures using Windows Live Photo Gallery.
I’m suspecting prank here. Who walks around with porn on their memory stick? And if you did, you’d probably have seen it autoplay by now.
That line has also been used to kick off some non-paperclip porn.
Feralboy owes me a keyboard too.
Christinelaing, you mean I shouldn’t?
WMDKitty
I read that last word wrongly.
@Catnip — *snerk* I can see how that might happen.
Brownian #36 doesn’t see the difference between Catholic_dogma.ppt and Penis_overload.ppt
I think I spotted it, one of them is vile and deeply offensive with no redeeming features.
frog @ 125
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10872071-landmark-catholic-priest-abuse-trial-begins-in-philadelphia
and here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/philadelphia-priest-sex-abuse-trial-francis-trauger_n_1385964.html
All these Catholic, Protestant, and Evangelical obscenity threads remind me of one of the funniest and truest lines from Blackadder:
“You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church?”
(Spoken by the Bishop of Bath and Wells)
The journalism here is particularly weak and protective of the RCC. What fucking reporter doesn’t ask one of the parents or the cops “please describe the pictures in detail”?
As has been pointed out above, all we know is that the pictures were of men and were “indecent”, according to an audience of catholic parents.
Such an audience might well find beefcake shots of muscly young men baring their chests and and flashing some buttocks to be “indecent”.
If it was porn, why didn’t the article say “pornography”?
@139: I was listening to the audiobook of Stephen Greenblatt’s The Swerve, which contains a lot of stuff about the condition of the 15th-century RCC, based on the writings of a member of the Curia. That Blackadder quote is *not* satire; it’s a straightforward accurate description.
I expect things are only marginally better today, and that only because the Church no longer wields the worldly power it once did.
“No, I could never get used to the underwear.”