Home > More Funny Stuff > 7 Reasons the 21st Century is Making You Miserable
Featured  

7 Reasons the 21st Century is Making You Miserable

By David Wong
article image

Scientists call it the Naked Photo Test, and it works like this: say a photo turns up of you nakedly doing something that would shame you and your family for generations. Bestiality, perhaps. Ask yourself how many people in your life you would trust with that photo. If you're like the rest of us, you probably have at most two.

Even more depressing, studies show that about one out of four people have no one they can confide in.


The Sad Bear 1, by Nedroid

The average number of close friends we say we have is dropping fast, down dramatically in just the last 20 years. Why?

#1. We don't have enough annoying strangers in our lives.

That's not sarcasm. Annoyance is something you build up a tolerance to, like alcohol or a bad smell. The more we're able to edit the annoyance out of our lives, the less we're able to handle it.

The problem is we've built an awesome, sprawling web of technology meant purely to let us avoid annoying people. Do all your Christmas shopping online and avoid the fat lady ramming her cart into you at Target. Spend $5,000 on a home theater system so you can see movies on a big screen without a toddler kicking the back of your seat. Hell, rent the DVD's from Netflix and you don't even have to spend the 30 seconds with the confused kid working the register at Blockbuster.

Get stuck in the waiting room at the doctor? No way we're striking up a conversation with the smelly old man in the next seat. We'll plug the iPod into our ears and have a text conversation with a friend or play our DS. Filter that annoyance right out of our world.


From outofbalance.org

Now that would be awesome if it were actually possible to keep all of the irritating shit out of your life. But, it's not. It never will be. As long as you have needs, you'll have to deal with people you can't stand from time to time. We're losing that skill, the one that lets us deal with strangers and tolerate their shrill voices and clunky senses of humor and body odor and squeaky shoes. So, what encounters you do have with the outside world, the world you can't control, make you want to go on a screaming crotch-punching spree.


Oh, yeah. Right in the crotch, buddy.

#2. We don't have enough annoying friends, either.

Lots of us were born into towns full of people we couldn't stand. As a kid, maybe you found yourself in an elementary school classroom, packed in with two dozen kids you did not choose and who shared none of your tastes or interests. Maybe you got beat up a lot.

But, you've grown up. And if you're, say, a huge DragonForce fan, you can go find their forum and meet a dozen people just like you. Or even better, start a private room with your favorite few and lock everybody else out. Say goodbye to the tedious, awkward, painful process of dealing with somebody who's truly different. That's another Old World inconvenience, like having to wash your clothes in a creek or wait for a raccoon to wander by the outhouse so you can wipe your ass with it.

The problem is that peacefully dealing with incompatible people is crucial to living in a society. In fact, if you think about it, peacefully dealing with people you can't stand is society. Just people with opposite tastes and conflicting personalities sharing space and cooperating, often through gritted teeth.

Fifty years ago, you had to sit in a crowded room to see a movie. You didn't get to choose; you either did that or you missed the movie. When you got a new car, everyone on the block came and stood in your yard to look it over. You can bet that some of those people were assholes.


Your parents, circa 1982

Yet, on the whole, people back then were apparently happier in their jobs and more satisfied with their lives. And get this: They had more friends.

That's right. Even though they had almost no ability to filter their peers according to common interests (hell, often you were just friends with the guy who happened to live next door), they still came up with more close friends than we have now-people they could trust.

It turns out, apparently, that after you get over that first irritation, after you shed your shell of "they listen to different music because they wouldn't understand mine" superiority, there's a sort of comfort in needing other people and being needed on a level beyond common interests. It turns out humans are social animals after all. And that ability to suffer fools, to tolerate annoyance, that's literally the one single thing that allows you to function in a world populated by other people who aren't you. Otherwise, you turn emo. Science has proven it.

#3. Texting is a shitty way to communicate.

I have this friend who uses the expression "No, thank you," in a sarcastic way. It means, "I'd rather be shot in the face." He puts a little ironic lilt on the last two words that lets you know. You ask, "Want to go see that new Rob Schneider movie?" And, he'll say, "No, thank you."

So one day we had this exchange via text:

Me: "Hey, do you want me to bring over that leftover chili I made?"

Him: "No, thank you"

That pissed me off. I'm proud of my chili. It takes four days to make it. I grind up the dried peppers myself; the meat is expensive, hand-tortured veal. And, now my offer to give him some is dismissed with his bitchy catchphrase?

I didn't speak to him for six months. He sent me a letter, I mailed it back, unread, with a dead rat packed inside.

It was my wife who finally ran into him and realized that the "No, thank you" he replied with was not meant to be sarcastic, but was a literal, "No, but thank you for offering." He had no room in his freezer, it turns out.


The Sad Bear #2, by Nedroid

So did we really need a study to tell us that more than 40 percent of what you say in an e-mail is misunderstood? Well, they did one anyway.

How many of your friends have you only spoken with online? If 40 percent of your personality has gotten lost in the text transition, do these people even really know you? The people who dislike you via text, on message boards or chatrooms or whatever, is it because you're really incompatible? Or, is it because of the misunderstood 40 percent? And, what about the ones who like you?

Many of us try to make up that difference in sheer numbers, piling up six dozen friends on MySpace. But here's the problem ...

#4. Online company only makes us lonelier.

When someone speaks to you face-to-face, what percentage of the meaning is actually in the words, as opposed to the body language and tone of voice? Take a guess.

It's 7 percent. The other 93 percent is nonverbal, according to studies. No, I don't know how they arrived at that exact number. They have a machine or something. But we didn't need it. I mean, come on. Most of our humor is sarcasm, and sarcasm is just mismatching the words with the tone. Like my friend's "No, thank you."

You don't wait for a girl to verbally tell you she likes you. It's the sparkle in her eyes, her posture, the way she grabs your head and shoves your face into her boobs.

That's the crux of the problem. That human ability to absorb the moods of others through that kind of subconscious osmosis is crucial. Kids born without it are considered mentally handicapped. People who have lots of it are called "charismatic" and become movie stars and politicians. It's not what they say; it's this energy they put off that makes us feel good about ourselves.

When we're living in Text World, all that is stripped away. There's a weird side effect to it, too: absent a sense of the other person's mood, every line we read gets filtered through our own mood instead. The reason I read my friend's chili message as sarcastic was because I was in an irritable mood. In that state of mind, I was eager to be offended.

And worse, if I do enough of my communicating this way, my mood never changes. After all, people keep saying nasty things to me! Of course I'm depressed! It's me against the world!

No, what I need is somebody to shake me by the shoulders and snap me out of it. Which leads us to No. 5 ...

#5. We don't get criticized enough.

Most of what sucks about not having close friends isn't the missed birthday parties or the sad, single-player games of ping pong with the wall. No, what sucks is the lack of real criticism.

In my time online I've been called "fag" approximately 104,165 times. I keep an Excel spreadsheet. I've also been called "asshole" and "cockweasel" and "fuckcamel" and "cuntwaffle" and "shitglutton" and "porksword" and "wangbasket" and "shitwhistle" and "thundercunt" and "fartminge" and "shitflannel" and "knobgoblin" and "boring."

And none of it mattered, because none of those people knew me well enough to really hit the target. I've been insulted lots, but I've been criticized very little. And don't ever confuse the two. An insult is just someone who hates you making a noise to indicate their hatred. A barking dog. Criticism is someone trying to help you, by telling you something about yourself that you were a little too comfortable not knowing.


Above: A flamboyant transvestite with about
five times as many friends as the average person

Tragically, there are now a whole lot of people who never have those conversations. The interventions, the brutal honesty, the, "you know, everybody's pissed off because of what you said last night, but nobody wants to say anything because they're afraid of you," sort of conversations. Those horrible, awkward, wrenchingly uncomfortable sessions that you can only have with someone who sees right to the center of you.

E-mail and texting are awesome tools for avoiding that level of honesty. With text, you can respond when you feel like it. You can measure your words. You can pick and choose which questions to answer. The person on the other end can't see your face, can't see you get nervous, can't detect when you're lying. You have almost total control and as a result that other person never sees past your armor, never sees you at your worst, never knows the embarrassing little things about yourself that you can't control. Gone are the common quirks, humiliations and vulnerabilities that real friendships are built on.

Browse around people's MySpace pages, look at the characters they create for themselves. If you've built a pool of friends via a blog, building yourself up as a misunderstood, mysterious Master of the Night, it's kind of hard to log on and talk about how you went to prom and got diarrhea out on the dance floor. You never get to really be yourself, and that's a very lonely feeling.

And, on top of all that ...

#6. We're victims of the Outrage Machine.

A whole lot of the people still reading this are saying, "Of course I'm depressed! People are starving! America has turned into Nazi Germany! My parents watch retarded television shows and talk about them for hours afterward! People are dying in meaningless wars all over the world!"

But how did we wind up with a more negative view of the world than our parents? Or grandparents? Back then, people didn't live as long and babies died more often. Diseases were more common. In those days, if your buddy moved away the only way to communicate was with pen and paper and a stamp. We have Iraq, but our parents had Vietnam (which killed 50 times more people) and their parents had World War 2 (which killed 1,000 times as many). Some of your grandparents grew up at a time when nobody had air conditioning. All of their parents grew up without it.

We are physically better off today in every possible way in which such things can be measured ... but you sure as hell wouldn't know that if you're getting your news online. Why?

Well, ask yourself: If some music site posts an article called, "Fall Out Boy is a Fine Band" and on the same day posts another one called, "Fall Out Boy is the Shittiest Fucking Band of the Last 100 Years, Say Experts," which do you think will get the most traffic? The second one wins in a blowout. Outrage manufactures word-of-mouth.

The news blogs many of you read? The people running them know the same thing. Every site is in a dogfight for traffic (even if they don't run ads, they still measure their success by the size of their audience) and so they carefully pick through the wires for the most inflammatory story possible. The other blogs start echoing the same story from the same point of view. If you want, you can surf all day and never swim out of the warm, stagnant waters of the "aren't those bastards evil" pool.


Actually, if you count the guy holding the camera, this man
statistically has more friends than most of us do.

Only in that climate could those silly 9/11 conspiracy theories come about (saying the Bush administration and the FDNY blew up the towers, and that the planes were holograms). To hear these people talk, every opposing politician is Hitler, and every election is the freaking apocalypse. All because it keeps you reading.


9/11 photos. Circled: Conspiracy

This wasn't as much a problem in the old days, of course. Some of us remember having only three channels on TV. That's right. Three. We're talking about the '80s here. So there was something unifying in the way we all sat down to watch the same news, all of it coming from the same point of view. Even if the point of view was retarded and wrong, even if some stories went criminally unreported, we at least all shared it.

That's over. There effectively is no "mass media" any more so, where before we disagreed because we saw the same news and interpreted it differently, now we disagree because we're seeing completely different freaking news. When we can't even agree on the basic facts, the differences become irreconcilable. That constant feeling of being at bitter odds with the rest of the world brings with it a tension that just builds and builds.

We humans used to have lots of natural ways to release that kind of angst. But these days...

#7. We feel worthless, because we actually are worth less.

There's one advantage to having mostly online friends, and it's one that nobody ever talks about:

They demand less from you.

Sure, you emotionally support them, comfort them after a breakup, maybe even talk them out of a suicide. But knowing someone in meatspace adds a whole, long list of annoying demands. Wasting your whole afternoon helping them fix their computer. Going to funerals with them. Toting them around in your car every day after theirs gets repossessed by the bank. Having them show up unannounced when you were just settling in to watch the Dirty Jobs marathon on the Discovery channel, then mentioning how hungry they are until you finally give them half your sandwich.

You have so much more control in Instant Messenger, or on a forum, or in World of Warcraft.

The problem is you are hard-wired by evolution to need to do things for people. Everybody for the last five thousand years seemed to realize this and then we suddenly forgot it in the last few decades. We get suicidal teens and scramble to teach them self-esteem. Well, unfortunately, self-esteem and the ability to like yourself only come after you've done something that makes you likable. You can't bullshit yourself. If I think Todd over here is worthless for sitting in his room all day, drinking Pabst and playing video games one-handed because he's masturbating with the other one, what will I think of myself if I do the same thing?


The Sad Bear #3, by Nedroid

You want to break out of that black tar pit of self-hatred? Brush the black hair out of your eyes, step away from the computer and buy a nice gift for someone you loathe. Send a card to your worst enemy. Make dinner for your mom and dad. Or just do something simple, with an tangible result. Go clean the leaves out of the gutter. Grow a damn plant.

It ain't rocket science; you are a social animal and thus you are born with little happiness hormones that are released into your bloodstream when you see a physical benefit to your actions. Think about all those teenagers in their dark rooms, glued to their PC's, turning every life problem into ridiculous melodrama. Why do they make those cuts on their arms? It's because making the pain-and subsequent healing-tangible releases endorphins they don't get otherwise. It's pain, but at least it's real.

That form of stress relief via mild discomfort used to be part of our daily lives, via our routine of hunting gazelles and gathering berries and climbing rocks and fighting bears. No more. This is why office jobs make so many of us miserable; we don't get any physical, tangible result from our work. But do construction out in the hot sun for two months, and for the rest of your life you can drive past a certain house and say, "Holy shit, I built that." Maybe that's why mass shootings are more common in offices than construction sites.

It's the kind of physical, dirt-under-your-nails satisfaction that you can only get by turning off the computer, going outdoors and re-connecting with the real world. That feeling, that "I built that" or "I grew that" or "I fed that guy" or "I made these pants" feeling, can't be matched by anything the internet has to offer.

Except, you know, this website.


Submit to: Reddit Facebook StumbleUpon Digg Del.icio.us

Post Comment

218 Comments

HappenedAlong, while your way of thinking makes sense to you, it's oddly parallel to the ideas of Ted Kaczynski. I love the humor on this site, but I don't find muh humor in this article, and I'm fine with that. I'm with this all the way. On a separate note, where the fuck did that Bear learn how to write?

Posted on 5/3/2008 3:48:02 PM

this is a great peice of thinking, I agree we are all spoiled and need to get on with being kind to each other.

Posted on 4/30/2008 1:23:10 PM

Was that pic of the two weirdos at ren fest taken in MD? I think i might know them...

Posted on 4/16/2008 8:30:32 AM

Two macs in one room? Good thing they got a picture. That is something we won't see for a long time.

Posted on 4/15/2008 1:10:22 PM

Maybe we're too intolerant and strung out to deal with people because our government has conditioned us to be that way. Work 80 hours a week to pay for the rising cost of um, EVERYTHING and then try to find some down time or you time on top of making ends meet and being force fed commercials telling you to upgrade to the newest thing. All at the same time while sacrificing your liberties for the illusion of safety. Hmm, no wonder i want to lock myself up and not deal with anyone, I'm easier to control that way and that's just how they want us.

Posted on 4/14/2008 11:35:54 PM

That poor bear...I'd come to his birthday party/bar mitzvah/Christmas.

Posted on 4/14/2008 11:25:56 AM

texting can be a terrible form of communication.. and with that said, you must take it with a grain of salt. so in that case, your mis-interpretation had nothing to do with the text

Posted on 4/12/2008 7:21:07 PM

This article seems to advocate exposing yourself to more annoyances to be happier. There was something in the writer's tone and word choice that just seemed... I guess he's just grouchy and mocking society. Now did he ever wonder whether maybe the reason why people filter out annoyances the minute we get the technology to do so is because the past, where people supposedly "had to" deal with their annoying neighbors, wasn't so effing great? Oh sure, I've experienced myself how some tolerance of annoyances in others offers advantages not offered by full out isolation (advantages such as somthing to do) but I also find that my "annoying people" don't always offer me a whole lot and I remember every time I meet them, why I once isolated myself in the first place. People are annoying largely because they have bad manners. It's a vicious cycle in that the bad manners rampant in today's society encourage people to reject each other, and the rejection leads to isolation, which leads to people being socially unskilled and out of practice with etiquette, which leads to continued poor manners. However, going out and dealing with annoying people is not the right approach. You can go and deal with people, meet new people, and decide that you'll have SOME tolerance for annoying traits rather than ZERO tolerance for annoyances. However, if you go out there all determined to "meet annoying people" (and yes I'm sure the author was being a bit mocking or humorous there) but if you go out there expecting people to be annoying and just accepting it, you'll never make it. First of all that focus wiill mean you'll just notice the annoying things more... and second it will make you push yourself to tolerate annoyances and rudeness. You'll hit a point where you won't be able to stand it any more and get burnt out. So, yes, have some tolerance, but by all means continue to filter people out if you find them disrespectful of aggravating, or opposed to your values, or in serious personality conflict with you. Life is too short to waste on annoyance all the time!

Posted on 4/11/2008 9:55:56 PM

I have to say, I thoroughly dislike this article. Its entire premise seems to be that, because of the rise of the Internet and cellphones, we can now pick and choose who we socialise with in a way that wasn't possible before, and that this prevents us from developing the skills we need to deal with 'annoying people'. This is simply untrue. How many people realistically choose friends that are annoying and whom they dislike? Even fifty years ago, do you think that was the case? People were still selective in their friendships—hell, the Fifties was a much more divisive time than now, I'm certain. That doesn't prevent you in any way from learning the requisite social skills to deal with annoying people. Many of us have to do this every day, by dealing with an annoying boss or colleagues. You seem to suggest that these annoying people enrich our lives, but in reality they are simply a cause of stress. So what—we should torture ourselves by forcing ourselves to interact with more annoying people? You're welcome to do that, if you wish, but please don't ever recommend that as a road to happiness. I'm all for getting to know people better and breaking down walls between people, but it's obvious to all and sundry that there are some people who you are *never* going to get on with, and forcing a relationship with them is pointless. People who are uninteresting, or prejudiced, or with whom you just don't 'click'. Why is it wrong to make more of an effort with people you like than with people who you will never like? To the author: Would you consider having a romantic relationship with someone you hate? If not, why not? Are you not being a hypocrite by exercising your right to avoid people whom you dislike? Your idea that text-based communication is "filtered through your own mood" may be partially valid, but you have taken it to an absurd point. You suggest that, because of this filtering, everything everyone says just magnifies your existing mood! This is patently nonsense. What if I wrote you a love letter, but you read it while feeling sad? Would the love letter only make you feel more sad? That seems a particularly inane point on your part. Similarly, your point about text-based communication losing much of the meaning of the original is certainly valid, but not to the point that all textual communication is worthless as you seem to suggest. Most people with half a brain are aware that the subtle nuances of speech are not picked up in a text message and have the sense to *ask* if the sender was being sarcastic. I agree that many people do not receive true criticism, and I agree that perhaps people have fewer intimate relationships as before, and this is a great shame. I agree that we should talk to strangers more, as many of them turn out to be perfectly nice people. I also agree that physical exercise (like cleaning, doing something practical and tangible as you mention) can make use more happy, but you have confused this for 'interacting with annoying people more'. Most of the premises in this article are simply invalid. Your reference to teenage self-injury is also particularly insulting to this group of people: self-injury is associated with mental health problems, and you are only trivialising a serious medical condition that merits treatment like any other. The fact that more people are depressed now than before is almost certainly to do with higher rates of diagnosis—people in the 1950s considered being mentally ill a terrible stigma, and would likely have been institutionalised had they voiced any such concerns. We live in a far better time now than then.

Posted on 4/10/2008 3:23:08 PM

This fits in nicely with the "grouchy old douchebag" syndrome described in another article. People, the changes in methods of interacting aren't going to affect our sorry-ass human nature, any more than switching from letters to telephone conversations did. At any rate, it won't change mine. I don't dislike people, but I hate bringing friends to my house or spending too much time in theirs. I don't attend people's funerals or weddings out of kindness, only if I think it might be fun (which would be odd for a funeral). I have trouble interacting face-to-face and tend to misread body cues and voices... which I guess makes me mentally handicapped? Anyway, I find online interaction is actually a little less awkward, and I haven't noticed it turning me into less of a human being. In fact, my social skills in real-life encounters have improved since I started talking to people online.

Posted on 4/8/2008 6:39:36 PM

A very insightful article. Thank you.

Posted on 4/8/2008 3:27:25 PM

I'm gonna say Occam's Razor on this one: who benefits? Let's see OBL because for the price of two or three Superbowl® ads, he's kept his movement's name on the tongue tips of nearly everyone on the planet? That kind of marketing is priceless and certainly worth several followers! The only cheaper way for PR would be if he'd release a sex tape. Why not? It worked for Gene Simmons (ick)!

Posted on 4/8/2008 1:17:34 PM

so, I just can leave this 9/11 conspiracy thing alone, especially since it is painfully evident that our entire government was duped into it, how could some filmmaker figure it out, and if so, wouldn't this guy have been snuffed by the 'conspirators' before releasing the movie? Ok, onto the fun answers to 'who benefits from 9/11': So since the event, oil prices have surged and since the Administration gets no profit from oil directly and people are actually driving less, now the people who will benefit are the alternative fuel people! Think about it! We need to find cheaper, cleaner fuel...like ethanol. Ethanol comes from plants grown by farmers! They can charge more for both fuel crop AND food crop now! Farmers are our enemies and they've drawn in Toyota! Toyota is profiteering on our 9/11 dead by selling us Priuses and selling gas guzzling Tundras to the wealthy (and blood thirsty) Farmers! Since farmers live in Red states, they must be Republicans...which put that Satan of Bush in office! It all makes sense!

Posted on 4/8/2008 1:08:35 PM

So ok, looking at the people who will benefit from 9/11... that would be the architects, contractors and tradesmen who get to rebuild the site and clean it up? OH MY GOD!!! what will we do? THEY ARE ALL AROUND US! And all this time we've been focusing on Muslims with a professed death wish against the U.S.! Shit! there were contractors working on the roof next door yesterday! Now that I think about it, it TOTALLY makes sense! some tradesmen are bricklayers and some bricklayers are...MASONS! And we all know that masons work for the Illuminati! I can't believe I have puzzled out the truth without them stoppin

Posted on 4/8/2008 12:49:14 PM

Wow, this just reminded me of what a fucking loser I am! Thanks, Cracked!

Posted on 4/8/2008 2:37:24 AM

wow...fairly funny and incredibly fucking right...I'm actually gunnu log off right after this and start trying to actually find something to do...wow.

Posted on 4/6/2008 4:32:06 PM

I think that the issue of 9/11 has little to do with the point of this article, which I find to be very well written btw. However once the topic has been mentioned, let me ask you the key question nobody seems to ask. I was told this by my economic geography professor and it has always helped to strip away political propaganda from fact. The key question always is: "Who benefits (profits) from it?" If you answer this question correctly (you may find a 'correlation' between the main campaign contributors of the current administration and those who benefit) you will probably get a surprisingly very clear picture. Just follow the trail of the money...

Posted on 4/3/2008 5:16:19 PM

wow, this is incredibly well writen. not as funny as other but deffinatly very informative and interesting. really gave me something to think aobut.

Posted on 4/2/2008 7:09:22 PM

Extremely well written, by far the best piece I've read on this site.

Posted on 4/2/2008 6:57:30 PM

You know, this article is one of the best i have read. Really honest and true.

Posted on 4/2/2008 6:50:46 AM

More Funny Stuff


Popular stuff


Avatar
Michael Swaim
Posted: 5/12/2008 1:55:51 PM
Post Subject: The Weather Channel Sex Scandal: Oxymoron No Longer

The Weather Channel. The phrase brings to mind thoughts of planning your weekend, flipping through en route to According to Jim, maybe even watching a hurricane tear your crappy state a new asshole. B ...

Avatar American TV Sucks. Thanks For Rubbing It In, Japan: The Daily Nooner (EST)
Ever since this whole War on Terror thing started, America has been slowly and steadily falling ...
Avatar 8 Things That Pissed Me Off About The FoxNews Fat Cops Report
Last week, something happened to me for the first time: I had an internet success. The premiere epi ...
Avatar 5 Things The Cracked Readers Apparently Want to Read About
Cracked.com's Headitor, (that's "Head Editor" shortened to just one word, Sports Fans, and you'r ...
Avatar Now That Was Entertainment! The Friday Nooner (EST)!
Ross Wolinsky is taking a personal day today. Filling in for him will be his grandfather, Pappy ...
Avatar Florida Threatens To Secede, America Goes Back To Sleep
Yes, Florida is actually trying to split into two, with one half (presumably the one with Disney Wor ...
Avatar The 10 Worst Ice Cream Flavors Ever (An Obituary)
I love ice cream. It’s the only dessert that when I eat it, it somehow gets into my stomach and pu ...
Avatar Giving The Weirdos Their Due: The Daily Nooner (EST)!
Dear People With Very Specific Skills Who Put Repetitive Videos Of Themselves Showing Off Th ...
Avatar Innocent Disney Movie Or Harbinger Of The Apocalypse? The Daily Nooner (EST)!
When is the world going to end? That depends on who you ask. Scientists say the sun will burn ...
Avatar The Ultimate Scientology Video Finally Reveals The Secret To Unlocking Your Thetans
digg_url = 'http://www.cracked.com/blog/2008/05/07/scientology-releases-slew-of-new-videos-on-yo ...
Recently Popular
Recently popular on Digg