Is It Just Me or Is Everything Shit? by Steve Lowe, Alan Mcarthur, Brendan Hay

choice. Their stupid, stupid, stupid choice. At least this helps relieve overcrowding in the goat-sacrificing, God-raping public schools.
    The problem only kicks in every time the government attempts to redirect taxpayer money into these private institutions, through scams like “faith-based initiatives” or school voucher programs. Listen, conservative America, let’s make a deal: We stop bugging you about the right to bear arms, and you stop trying to eradicate the separation of church and state. Cool?
    Things are already worse in the UK, where a quarter of all schools are religious, and Britain’s most worrying new educationalist is evangelical secondhand car magnate Sir Peter Vardy. At his flagship Emmanuel College in Gateshead, pupils have to carry not one but two Bibles, which, even if you’re quite big on the whole Bible thing, does seem excessive.
    So how does God influence the teaching? This was spelled out in a controversial document—now removed from the Web site—called “Christianity and the Curriculum,” which reckons science classes should show how “the study of science is not an end in itself but a glimpse into the rational and powerful hand of the Almighty.” Art classes should show how art can “serve the glory of God and celebrate the complex beauty of His creation.” At which point, even the late Bob Ross who painted all those pretty little trees on PBS would start feeling his intelligence being insulted.
    The document went on to say—and this is not made up—that history lessons could usefully consider whether, during World War II, Britain was saved from Hitler by God intervening to halt the Nazis at the channel. Meaning that maybe the Battle of Britain film classic
Reach for the Skies
could more accurately have been called
Reach from the Skies with a Big Middle Finger Saying, NOT SO FAST, MR. HITLER!
    We personally think it’s a crying shame that no school in the land teaches our own theory of creation: that this whole grand enterprise is merely an imaginative figment of Uncle Mick who smokes a pipe and seems to live entirely on toasted sandwiches. We firmly believe that he dreamed the whole thing up one afternoon while watching bowling, which he loves, and the moment he gets bored, that’s it, we’re all toast, just like one of Uncle Mick’s delicious sandwiches.
    We were going to set a school up, but we couldn’t be bothered.
    FASHION JOURNALISM
    Words to go with pictures of people wearing clothes written by girls with misspelled first names (so many z’s) and double-barreled second ones.
    At heart, fashion journalism isn’t about clothes; it’s about being so Now that by the time you’ve finished typing the word
Now
it’s too late, because by now you’re Then.
    Among fashion journalism’s key linguistic traits are:
    •Sentences that resemble complicated Google searches: “the Kate Moss/Sienna Miller/Mischa Barton school of Gramercy Park bling-meets-boho laid-back high-chic.” Keep up, ugly losers.
    •Casually dropped French terminology—
au courant, de la saison
—in the style of a yet-to-be-created Mike Myers character.
    •Weird boasts. Like “I’m a fashion innovator,” “I take classic Armani pieces and wear them in a modern way,” “I’m an accessories freak.” These are good things, presumably?
    •Hyperbole. “Oh Jesus, bite me on the ass these bags of the season are making me so high, they must be a gift from God!”
    •Referring to people you have never met by their first names: Kimora, Michael, Lemmy.
    •Deification of models. Not just models modeling, but interviews with models about modeling, too! Here’s Karolina Kurkova, a model, on what it’s like to be a model: “It’s not just about being cute. It’s about creating something through light and clothes and expressions. It’s like theater.” This woman was the highest-paid model in 2003, but we should feel very sorry for her: “Modeling looks glamorous from the outside, but sometimes I