The ‘Pitch Perfect’ star took the stage wearing a cop costume before ranting about disappointing police strippers.
Rebel Wilson delivered an uncensored moment at the MTV Video Music Awards.
The Pitch Perfect star took the stage wearing a cop costume before stripping it off to reveal a “F— Tha Stripper Police” shirt.
Wilson, who presented the award for best hip-hop video, began by saying that “a lot of people have problems with the police,” suggesting that she was going to say something about police brutality and recent, controversial police-involved killings.
But instead she went on a rant about disappointing police strippers, ripping off the costume to reveal her obscene shirt. MTVs censors likely weren’t laughing though as the “F word” in Wilson’s shirt wasn’t censored, and while MTV tried to avoid frontal footage of her from the top of the shirt down, the writing on her shirt could be seen on monitors on the stage and from side and distant shots. Furthermore, the top of the “F word” was also seen from the main camera on Wilson.
“They come to your house. You think you’re getting arrested, and you just get a lap dance and it’s usually uninspired,” Wilson said. “I hired a police stripper for my grandma’s 80th and he wouldn’t even feel her up…I hate this injustice, hence the shirt.”
Wilson went on to present the Moonman for best hip-hop video to Nicki Minaj for “Anaconda.”
I just had to write this. I can’t keep listening to you and your faith in guns and gun culture and let you get away with it. So here goes:
Saying you need to keep a gun in your home to defend against intruders is like saying you keep a can of kerosene in your kitchen in case of house fires.
Let’s examine a few of the ways you might want to use a gun to defend yourself:
1) Someone tries to enter your home and rob you or assault your family. The very law that enables you, the home owner, to keep a gun in your house will be the same law that enables a burglar to enter your home with a gun. If you banned guns then yeah you might not have a gun, but almost certainly neither will the burglar. You can defend your home and family with a knife. You can turn and run and call the police. But the burglar will not have an offensive weapon which he could use to kill your kids from 50 paces away. Sure, women living alone and the frail and elderly have a higher risk of injury if a violent burglar enters their home, but they STILL have a much better chance of escape when there are no guns involved. If your response to this is now “yeah, but if we run the dude’s going to steal my stuff” then you are basically saying you are prepared to injure/kill a person over a TV, which is utterly ridiculous and you shouldn’t be allowed a weapon anyway.
2) Assault or attack in the street/a public space. Again, it is MUCH harder for someone to injure or kill large numbers of people when the perpetrator can’t shoot them in the back from 50 feet away. They can’t shoot people in the back when they have no access to guns. In the case of incidents like the Boston marathon bombings, I have no doubt people at the event carried or owned guns, but this didn’t help the those who died or were injured in the blasts. Bullets don’t stop bombs and you can’t expect them to. Also, do you think Dylan Roof would have killed 9 people in that church in Charleston if he only had access to a knife? No way! That scrawny white kid with the embarassing haircut would have barely had time to draw his knife out of the first victim before being tackled to the floor.
3) Terrorism. As I said, guns don’t stop bombs, planes, trains or cars, no matter what Hollywood says. People in the twin towers probably owned or carried guns but it didn’t save them from burning and collapsing buildings.
Guns pretty much create the problems that you want them to solve. You want to protect the public by handing out guns to anyone who wants them? What a load of codswallop (it’s a British term, look it up).
A year or so ago in Britain, a kid walked into his school and killed his former teacher. He knifed her in the back. People in Britain were gobsmacked and teachers suddenly felt worried about going to school in case a former pupil didn’t agree with the grade they received. This kind of stuff just DOESN’T happen here and our country was left reeling. But you know what? It would have been a whole lot worse if the kid had a gun; he could have shot his teacher in the back, shot the students in the classroom, other teachers… but he killed one woman, and Lord knows she didn’t deserve to die, but it was only ONE person.
You have people being shot and killed every day of the week in the USA. There are so many school shootings in your country that it has almost become a damn cliché. You have men pointing guns at unarmed, innocent teenagers just because they can and it makes them feel big and powerful - men who are supposed to enforce the damn laws! People in Britain and Europe just cannot comprehend how you Americans can live like that, knowing that any day a madman could walk into your kids’ kindergarten and blow their heads off.
Seriously, you have absolutely no argument. You cannot prove to me that guns have no effect on the amount of violence and killing in America, and this is in part because the NRA have successfully lobbied to ban research into gun control. Why would they do that unless such research threatens the NRA’s insane idea that more guns lead to greater public safety?
Call me a bleeding heart liberal or tell me to get back to drinking tea and playing bowls (or whatever it is Americans think British people do all day), but don’t tell me that guns don’t kill people.
I love the Selection fandom, but I don’t love the casual racism that goes on. Amberley is Latina. She’s from Honduragua. That’s in Central America. Amberley wouldn’t be paper-pale, and neither would Maxon–he’s mixed-race, and so are all of the Schreave kids. There’s a lot of erasure of that fact.