2girls1cup (aka cupchicks): a guide for the unwary


It had to happen; goatse and other shock sites have lost their shock value.

Instead, people are now flocking to a shockingly shocking shocker of a shock site that goes by the name ‘2girls1cup’. It’s hosted at 2girls1cup.com (and recently has been mirrored by a [adjectives fail me] entrepreneur at cupchicks.com) but for pity’s sake do NOT feel that your life will be enriched by watching the video; these URLs are here for reference purposes only.

If I leave it at that, some people are still going to visit, so allow me to expand on my point:

You don’t need to see 2girls1cup to understand/appreciate the growing meme activity surrounding it. If you let your curiosity get the better of you, you will need a serious dose of mind-bleach to wash the stains away. Seriously. Hell, I’m even going to warn you to not go poking around too many ‘reactions’ videos (the primary subject of this post), as the majority of them contain repeated gagging, retching and/or outright vomiting. I’m a sympathy-hurler from way back and have no wish to subject others to something I myself can’t watch without discomfort.

OK, are we clear and agreed? You’re to look at the recommended links only and explore no further? Good-oh. On we go…

You may have noticed that YouTube features an alarming number of webcam videos that basically involve a person delivering a monologue to camera, or ‘hilariously’ lip-synching to one song or another. What has emerged from 2girls1cup is a sport that generates videos with the kind of spontaneity and raw emotion that is usually lacking in videos of this type.

It basically involves sitting a victim (or victims) in front of the 2girls1cup video and recording their reactions, or recording your own reaction to a first viewing. It is, essentially, a video version of My First Goatse (see also).

Please remember that I’ve tried to choose examples that are typical in every way bar the inclusion of gagging, retching and/or outright vomiting, *but* you should also be aware that some NSFW audio will be involved throughout:

Here is a typical ‘self-inflicted on webcam’ reaction.

Here is a typical ‘sharing 2girls1cup with friends on webcam’ reaction.

Here is a typical collection of 2girls1cup reactions.

Here’s a kindly chap who showed 2girls1cup to his mother on her birthday.

Here’s the 2girls1cup meme reaching Spain.

OK, all done? Curiosity aroused but (hopefully) held safely at bay?

Good, because I have a special reward for you.

If you find yourself wondering exactly what’s in the 2girls1cup video and/or sneering at the low-rent entertainment of the ‘reactions’ videos, then this very special music video with admirably high production values should see you right. Again, be aware that NSFW audio is involved:

The 2 Girls 1 Cup Song by Jon Lajoie

A FINAL WORD – I’m really trying to do you a favour here, so let me spell it out for you so there’s no confusion…

There are many ways for you to challenge yourself in this life; you do not need to subject yourself to coprophilia, coprophagia, emetophilia, vomerophilia, and this unique combination of all four to become a better person.

You do, however, need to be aware of this meme, because there is now a very good chance that at least one of you will soon be invited by a ‘friend’ to spend one short minute watching a video while they record your reaction.

UPDATE (12 Dec) – Comments and Trackback have been disabled on this entry, due to repeated spamming attempts by yet more entrepreneurs chasing the gold at the end of the cupchick rainbow.

Posted in Teh Interwebs | 6 Comments

Bad news for the sock-puppeteers

Via Toby

The Register – EU cracks down on fake blogger astroturfing: Nothing beats word of mouth for getting people to put their hand in their pockets. So it didn’t take long for cheeky marketing departments to cotton on to the power of blogs and pose as consumers praising their own particular widget to the skies to help lift their top line. Sneaky, perhaps, but usually legal. Not for much longer, however, as covert commercial blogging – or flogging – will soon be banned by Brussels. Under laws due to come into force at the beginning of next year, but likely to be delayed until April for the UK, companies posing as consumers on fake blogs, providing fake testimonies on consumer rating websites such as TripAdvisor, or writing fake book reviews on Amazon risk criminal or civil liability.. Those that break the new rules risk both civil proceedings and criminal prosecution. When it comes to catching the guilty in flagrante, the authorities will be allowed to make test purchases and enter premises without a warrant, if necessary. But the crucial word here is “risk” – the government has already indicated that only serious infringements will be prosecuted, although it is probably best to assume that it will prod into action the Office of Fair Trading and Trading Standards, the chief enforcement agencies, should an illegal commercial blog gain a high media profile.

I would dare say that the same law will apply to repeated false-face endorsements of certain political websites that also involve significant commercial interests.

There are some doubts about the effectiveness of the new law when “only serious infringements will be prosecuted”, but the risk of prosecution is sure to, at least, keep mainstream agencies and clients on the straight and narrow.

OK, so I’m an optimist…

Posted in Consume!, The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off

Liberal Conspiracy launches

Liberal Conspiracy – We want to be the hub: There is no denying that Liberal Conspiracy is partly born out of the frustration that many organisations who champion liberal-left ideals do not cooperate much with each other. It isn’t just the sectarianism that has traditionally been the preserve of hard-left socialists. As our politics splits up into single-issue groups concerned about the environment, civil liberties, feminism, anti-racism, social justice, alleviating poverty etc – there isn’t much dialogue taking place between them and there is certainly a lack of broad coalition-building to push for political aims together. We want to be the network hub where other organisations sharing our ideals are promoted and their campaigns highlighted.

I’ll be watching with interest.

Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 1 Comment

Spot the inconsistency

Independent – My Life in Media: Guido Fawkes Paul Staines

What is the best thing about your job?

The stalkers I’ve had. Some of them take it all a bit seriously…

Name the one career ambition you want to realise before you retire:

I’d like to destroy a minister’s career…

Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 5 Comments

Nadine Dorries: no regrets

The first post on Nadine Dorries: Feedback is now live.

Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off

Ashes to ashes, funk to funky…

Rebekah Wade on the pile

[For those who came in late: PROOF: Rebekah Wade is a guy!]

In the case of Tony Blair, my two eldest boys were a bit young to fully appreciate the implications of burning someone in effigy (a situation that led to the creation of The World According to Leo Blair), so the creation of that guy was very much a personal affair.

This year, however, it was very much a family affair…. which I thought fitting, given The Sun’s reputation as a family newspaper.


Anyway, the whole clan chipped in this year (even the very youngest crumpled a bit of newspaper), so we were free to enter the guy into the competition line-up under the ‘9 years and over’ category.

Which. We. Won.


I was called in on spruiker duty at the last minute, so I missed the judging… and the burn… but I did get to enjoy a fair bit of back-patting as the torch-wielding villagers filed past the main gate on their way into the bonfire.

I’m pleased to report the following:

– The guys were arranged with slightly less care this year, but the end result was quite pleasing; Rebekah Wade appeared to have been cast aside like the trash she is.

– I also have reliable testimony of distinct toe-curling before Rebekah was consumed by fire (see the pre-burn report for why this is important).

I was, however, slightly disturbed to learn that the mock-up of the newspaper proved surprisingly resilient to flame, and survived well past the point where the heat of the fire made it impossible to get any more photos:

Rebekah Wade burns!

A clear indication, I would think, of the challenges to come.

The next morning, the boys and I returned to the site of the burning to complete the ceremony by collecting some ashes.

These ashes will be put to good use very shortly. Watch this space.

A white, powdery substance.

Posted in Guy Fawkes Night, Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | 8 Comments

PROOF: Rebekah Wade is a guy!

I’m burning Rebekah Wade in effigy tomorrow night as part of the Guy Fawkes / Bonfire Night celebrations.

In keeping with tradition, she will first be paraded in front of the townspeople, and then ceremonially placed upon the bonfire.

Then (and I am not kidding you, as we take Bonfire Night very seriously around here) villagers will throw flaming torches at her and cheer as she burns.

To prepare for her weekend adventure, Rebekah has chosen to spend today relaxing in the garden, enjoying the fruits of her labour:

Rebekah Wade

As with the effigy of Tony Blair (final reports on the burn here and here), some serious voodoo is at work:

– The head itself is empty, but at the last minute it will be filled with roughly one kilo of rancid porridge (which is right now quietly decomposing behind the shed).

– Rebekah’s face, rather than being painted, has been finished with a lovingly-applied layer of her own lies.

– She is dressed, as you may note, in the type of power-suit she favours when badgering vulnerable young women into spouting right-wing propaganda, and her body has been stuffed with the finest copies of News of the World and The Sun that the local bins have to offer.

– Special care has been taken with the stuffing of her (ahem) reproductive area, which has been carefully lined with used sandpaper.

– I decided against shoes or boots at the last minute, and instead chose a pair of striped stockings for her feet. This is exactly what the Wicked Witch of the East was wearing *just* before a house fell on her.

I’ll be watching very carefully to see if her feet curl as she burns on Saturday. Only then will I know if my voodoo is strong.

Posted in Guy Fawkes Night, Rupert 'The Evil One' Murdoch | 2 Comments

I hope I get off this easy if I ever riddle someone with bullets

An innocent man has been murdered health-and-safetied to death, the verdict is ‘guilty‘, but Ian Blair is still clinging shamelessly to his job, and the public gets to pay the fine.

Oh, don’t look so surprised.

I’ll hand over to Septicisle for the rest. An excellent, informative, engaging and enraging read.

UPDATE – Beau Bo D’Or with a genius bit of ‘shopping.

Posted in The War on Stupid | Comments Off

Because you want it and she asked for it

Nadine Dorries: Feedback

No doubt her name will now be added to the rather selective list some people use to convince others that I’m a Tory-basher, but that’s life.

Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | Comments Off

Nadine Dorries and what she has (and has not) learned from Iain Dale

[Note – Garry has also blogged about this, because we have similar views on how bloggers should conduct themselves we’re both part of the same vast left-wing conspiracy.]

Yesterday, Nadine Dorries was all-drama as she released her ‘Minority Report’. In it, she made this claim:

We were greatly concerned to read in the Guardian on 27 October an article clearly aimed at undermining the credibility of Professor John Wyatt, which contained detailed information about Wyatt’s evidence, which was passed by him to the committee after his oral evidence session, and which could only have been passed on to the journalist concerned by a member of the Select Committee. There should be an enquiry about how this information got into the public domain and as to whether such a personal attack represents a serious breach of parliamentary procedure given that witnesses were told by the committee that any disclosure of personal interests would not prejudice the hearing of their evidence.

Just quickly, here’s a simple courtesy that Nadine couldn’t manage herself; a hyperlink to said article. There’s a mirror of it on the author’s weblog. (You may note distinct differences between the two versions… yes, the blog version contains more of those pesky hyperlinks.)

But like many people who blog in the style of Iain Dale, Nadine Dorries has learned the value of not actually linking to the item/person she’s attacking. This is a most-useful technique to use when you are launching an ad hominem attack on someone by falsely claiming that they have launched an ad hominem attack on yourself or one of your associates.

[It is here, class, that I must refer you to a related chapter showing you how to further perfect this technique by also refusing, redirecting and/or fouling *inbound* hyperlinks.]

Here’s the reaction from the author, Dr Ben Goldacre:

My article did indeed contain detailed information about Prof Wyatt’s evidence, but I suspect any enquiry set up to examine how I managed to obtain that information would finish its work well before the first set of tea and biscuits arrived, since all the facts came from the written evidence published openly and in full during the select committee hearing. There’s nothing clever about what I do, let me promise you.

Some readers of Iain Dale’s weblog refused to mindlessly accept/endorse Nadine’s nonsense and complete ignorance of parliamentary procedure as readily as Iain did. In fact one them posted this:

Chris Rodger said…

I have posted this on Nadine Dorries blog:
You make a serious allegation against the Guardian and by implication the journalist (Ben Goldacre) that wrote the piece. Yet as he explains here (http://www.badscience.net/2007/10/oooooh-im-in-the-minority-report/#more-561), he based his article on published information.
You should either justify why you have de facto accused him of “a breach of parliamentary procedure” or apologise and withdraw the comment.

October 31, 2007 10:09 AM

That comment was not published by Nadine Dorries. Needless to say, she didn’t withdraw her false claim or apologise for making it, either.

This distinct lack of accountability didn’t escape the attention of comment-contributors to Ben Goldacre’s weblog. One of them posted this:

BarryNL said,
(October 31, 2007 at 2:39 pm)

“It’s open for comment …”

Hmm, strange that all the comments seems to be positive. Let’s have a go and see if anyone can get her to approve a critical comment on that page…

[It should be noted for the record that another graduate of the Iain Dale School of Blogging classifies this kind of behaviour as a Denial of Service Attack.]

But the only challenging comments Nadine (eventually) published were so gently obscure in nature or so completely lacking in detail that they did nothing to actually challenge what she had to say (example: “I think you’re wrong here Nadine”). There was certainly no published reference to her false claims about Ben Goldacre.

Nadine Dorries then sought to address this little problem by refusing to publish *any* comments until further notice because she’s ‘too busy':

No More Comments
Posted Thursday, 1 November 2007 at 00:00

I am no longer going to post comments on my blog.

Please don’t send any more comments – It’s a time thing, I don’t have any.

I have to rely on the patience of others to read and post the comments for me. I am never in front of a computer for more than a couple of minutes at a time and this has now made reading the comments before they are posted impossible.

Knowing that there are comments on my site which I may not even have had time to see, makes me uncomfortable.

If any one wants to contact me you can still do so via the email facility on the home page.

I will continue to blog each day as I can do that on the run!!

Like yet *another* graduate of the Iain Dale School of Blogging, she has cleverly made a false claim and run away when it has been challenged.

[Psst! It is at this point, Nadine, that the Iain Dale Guide to Blogging Like a Complete Twat recommends that you scream “Personal attack!” and/or “Vitriol!” in a way that allows you to refuse all references to Ben Goldacre, instead of refusing comments altogether. Even if these claims are completely without basis, you need not be concerned because… you will be refusing all references to Ben Goldacre! A case study of the master at work is published here.]

Ben Goldacre and his readers have reacted in a suitably ‘obsessive’ fashion by ‘secretly conspiring’ in the following manner:

NickConnolly said,
(October 31, 2007 at 10:45 pm)

“There should be an enquiry about how this information got into the public domain and as to whether such a personal attack represents a serious breach of parliamentary procedure..”
I think we should start a petition for that inquiry right now! Presumably we can then all submit written evidence on ‘how to download stuff’ and ‘how to read stuff’.

Ben Goldacre said,
(October 31, 2007 at 11:14 pm)

ok seriously. that’s what I want for xmas. only you can give it to me. nothing could make me as happy as a response from the number10 petiton people on this petition. can anybody be bothered to start one? I reckon if you worded it right it would get through.

NickConnolly said,
(November 1, 2007 at 9:03 am)

Regarding Ben’s Xmas present:
The petition should be unsarcastic – phrased correctly you could probably even get a anti-abortionists to sign it.

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to support the call by MP Dr Bob Spink and MP Nadine Dorries for an enquiry into a recent article in the Guardian newspaper. The said article discussed the evidence of John Wyatt to the recent select committee discussing abortion law reform and was clearly aimed at undermining the credibility of his evidence. We ask the Prime Minister to ensure that concerns raised by Dr Spink are fully investigated, specifically:
* How did the journalist (Ben Goldacre) gain detailed evidence of Prof Wyatt’s oral submission
* How did the journalist gain access to evidence Prof Wyatt submitted after his oral submission
* Did a member of the committee act as a ‘mole’ for Ben Goldacre and pass on this information by some clandestine means
* Whether this constituted a personal attack and a breach of parliamentary procedure”

OK – who is up for actually starting the petition?

NickConnolly said,
(November 1, 2007 at 9:23 am)

OK changed the wording a little – removed names (apparently not OK to name people). If they accept it it should be:
[mod: I’ve snipped this URL, as it’s unlikely to be functional/useful at this stage, as the next comment makes clear]

Ben Goldacre said,
(November 1, 2007 at 9:31 am)

far be it from me tt involved in my own xmas present but I think it should simply demand an enquiry into how I obtained the oral and writtwn evidence to the committee as suggested by spink and dorries. and mention me by name. to be really christmassy.

I’m sorry, but I’m laughing too hard to write up a coherent conclusion. This lesson is over. Class dismissed.

[Homework assignment: Follow the exchange from here and keep a general eye on Ben Goldacre’s blog for further developments.]

UPDATE – Ah, I see that’s she’s learned consistency from Iain Dale, too. Despite claiming that she’s not publishing any more comments, Nadine is now publishing comments of support. For extra credit in this course, see if you can sneak a comment that is dripping with sarcasm past moderation.

Posted in The Political Weblog Movement | 4 Comments