In Which Two Kids Make Me Feel Bad for Fergie

In Which Two Kids Make Me Feel Bad for Fergie July 7, 2012

I didn’t think there was anything that could make me feel bad for Fergie and the Black Eyed Peas, especially that horrid song My Humps. But this video does it, two kids that turned it into a Christian song.


"And probably also hates his life, and all the indignities he had to suffer on ..."

Kavanaugh Writes Good Opinion that Overturned ..."
"I grew up knowing blacks didn't have it as well as whites in New Orleans ..."

NY Clerks Pulling a Kim Davis ..."
"This sounds less about slaveholders than about the rulemakers. I'd bet you dollars to donuts ..."

Ingraham’s Cruel Indifference to the Victims ..."
"We'll see.... Following the path of Sarah Huckster Sanders over the summer should provide some ..."

Trump’s Vetting Process: Even Worse than ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Oh, how precious! (Where’s my barf bag?)

  • dingojack

    So which one is supposd to be the duchess of pork?


  • You are a vicious, vicious man to dangle that in front of an old man who doesn’t even know what a Fergie and the Black Eyed Peas is and induce him, out of curiosity, to click through to that horror.

  • dingojack

    ‘You guys are so unhip, it’s a wonder your bums don’t fall off’.

    🙂 Dingo

  • lorn

    In a familial system of patriarchy, a patriarchy with homoerotic overtones as the man of the house ‘is penetrated by the spirit’ and everyone kisses up and kicks down these kids have found that they can please the father, and the father please the head patriarch, by actively participating in their own humiliation and degradation. Praising their oppressor, kissing the hand that holds the whip, and thanking them for their own chastisement, and being praised in return, indicates a high degree of mental conditioning.

    If they stay on this path they will do quite well in that twisted culture of kiss up and kick down hierarchical regime of enforced obedience and oppression. If terminology I use shocks it may be because you haven’t embraced the idea that Christianity is an abstracted, largely sexless, but still quite homoerotic, version of S&M. For the most part, at least for the last decades, in public, the thrashings and abuse are delivered verbally and the damage is emotional but the structure of authority is built on violence and submission.

  • teawithbertrand

    24 seconds of that is all I can stomach. Now I know.

  • Nathair

    So which one is supposd to be the duchess of pork?

    Yep, denigrating a woman because she doesn’t conform to your image of how she should look, comparing her to a pig because she doesn’t weigh what you think she should weigh… that shit just never stops being funny.

  • Reginald Selkirk

    0:06 “What you gonna do with atheists, all those pagan atheists?”

    Pagan atheists? Off to a great start.

  • Rip Steakface

    It’s a good thing we already have a huge number of anti-faith songs. We have Tim Minchin, who’s practically dedicated to it. On the heavy side, we have the bands Heathen and Atheist. Imagine by John Lennon for classic stuff. No One Heard by Spiritual Beggars for the psychedelic. I can go on.

  • Drew

    IIRC they are not actually christians. This is a group of people that make up christian parodies of popular songs, taking the Poe to extreme levels.

  • Nathair, dingojack was conflating Fergie, Black Eyed Pea, with Fergie, former Royal.

    And also the Duchess of Pork would make a great palate cleanser for the Baron of Beef.

    Suddenly I’m hungry.

  • Nathair

    Nathair, dingojack was conflating Fergie, Black Eyed Pea, with Fergie, former Royal

    by repeating a vicious tabloid label attacking her for how much she weighed back in the 1990s. Yeah, I got that.

  • And also dingojack’s Australian. So he got that news just now. He thinks he’s being topical. And their telephone system? It’s actually a game of telephone.

  • Nathair

    He thinks he’s being topical.

    I wasn’t objecting so much that he is stuck in the 1990s with his gossip, more that he is stuck in the 1950s with his characterization of women.

  • dingojack

    Nathair – as to my topicality see mine #4


  • dingojack

    Also you might find this and this useful when making ‘judgement calls’ on the comments of others.


  • dingojack

    See also the informal usage suggested here.


  • Nathair

    Oh, I see. When you parroted that vicious characterization you were being hip, or ironic, or sarcastic, or maybe all three and whatever the combination was it made it a perfectly acceptable thing to say about someone. Clearly all the fault lies with me and my “knee-jerk” feminism. Thank you so much for ‘splaining that to me!

  • dingojack

    Nathair – You’re welcome! Do you want a wipe for your spittle-flecked screen now?



  • Nathair

    Ahh, so now I’m ranting and spraying spit? Oh, of course! That’s the next step, right? It can’t possibly be that you said something offensive and are too arrogant to say “Yeah, sorry, wasn’t thinking, shouldn’t have said that.” No, no, no! It’s that I just didn’t understand your clever use of hip sarcastic ironic humour, I just reacted without thinking because I’m all angry and over-emotional. How silly of me, thanks for setting me straight.

  • dingojack

    And thank you for proving me correct. Goodnight!


  • Nathair

    And thank you for proving me correct.

    I object to you insulting a woman for not being thin enough and you “respond” by accusing me of being angry. Exactly what difference would that make? If I actually was angry, capslock and incoherent ranting angry, would that somehow make your “duchess of pork” retroactively less offensive? Did you learn that in Arguing For Trolls? If your opponent gets angry, or if you can make them appear angry, or if you just repeat “u mad bro?” often enough then you don’t have to deal with their actual point?

  • dingojack

    Firstly – you’re over reaction betrays your emotional state.

    Secondly – you are calling me a troll?

    Thirdly – you have a point?



    PS: no, really it’s far too late to argue with blow-in trolls. I’m going to hit the hay.

  • Nathair

    Firstly – Naturally you think I overreacted. If you don’t see anything wrong with insulting a woman for not being thin enough then any objection is going to seem like an overreaction to you.

    Secondly – No, I’m calling you wrong. What you said was wrong. Offensive. When called on it you have resorted to the standard troll tactic of U mad?

    Thirdly – Yes, I have a point. Insulting a woman because she isn’t thin enough is not funny. It is not hip. It is repugnant. Don’t do it. Clear enough?

    P.S. – And now I’m a “blow-in” troll and you’re going to take your ball and go home. Well argued, sir! You sure showed me!

  • And now back to the topic at hand…

    If this is real, there’s hope for the kids yet. Real Christian Conservative Kids (TM) wouldn’t know who the Black Eyed Peas were, let alone be singing their own version of it to what sounds like the original track itself.

    And the girl, near the end, actually shows bare midriff. Such immodesty is a clear indication that shes about to fall into the ways of sin in a big way…

  • Walton

    Nathair is right. Repeating a body-shaming tabloid nickname is not good. Our society’s obsession with thinness, and shaming and stigmatizing of anyone who doesn’t conform to “attractive” proportions, is extremely unhealthy; let’s avoid contributing to it.

  • janeymack

    Yeah, I agree with Nathair and Walton. You blew it, Dingo. Your comment was not cute or funny or hip. You may have thought you were being sarcastic or ironic; that’s a big ‘fail’ on your part; all you were being is insulting.

    I’ve seen your ‘nym in some of the conversations around FtB lately, including some of the ones about misogyny and related topics, and I was surprised to see you post the comment you did. You should assuredly know better. We all say things without thinking; the thing to do when called on it is to try to remember to think next time–not double down on the insult and then insult the person who pointed out your error.

    And you didn’t stick the flounce, either. Jerk.

  • dingojack

    Dear Walton et al. – Firstly, your irony/sarcasm meters may be outta of batteries, you might want to check that. Secondly, saying your going to bed (at 5:56am local time) is ‘flouncing’ is it? OK, if you say so.