“Chambers of Horror” degrades, victimizes women

A look in review at the serious problems in one staff-member’s experience at a renowned Atlanta Halloween locale. 

by Christen Thompson
Online Editor

“Have you been here before?”

The man next to me tells me he hasn’t but that the entertainment is supposed to be akin to the Saw/Hostel franchises: blood, gore and victims.

Upon going to “Chambers of Horror” at the Masquerade, a haunted house that Programming Board at Agnes Scott College sold tickets to this Halloween weekend, I assumed I knew what I was in for.

When going to a “haunted house,” or a “house of horrors,” one may expect and want to be scared and a bit humiliated. These are the things that make Halloween. It is in part a nostalgic holiday where one can be whatever they want, and in another an opportunity where one may be scared to wit’s end and receive no grief for it.

The haunted house in question, however, does not fall in either category.

I’ve seen Saw. I’ve seen Hostel. I consider myself aware of horror and thriller conventions and stereotypes. It is no secret to me that women are victimized for mass entertainment.

This horror house should not be qualified as mass entertainment, let alone something that anyone, regardless of gender, politics or awareness should condone. The events that happen in the so called “haunted house” are nothing less than despicable and disgusting, let alone morally reprehensible.

Tell me: When did rape become entertainment?

Tell me: When did calling a woman the c-word — whether or not she signed a waiver — become entertaining?

I signed a waiver at this event so I could be allowed in. But the fact that I signed this waiver should not indicate that I, a paying customer, can be personally degraded.

The worst part of all of this is that I wasn’t surprised. I almost expected to see women raped, tortured and imprisoned; I almost expected to be called the c-word. That is the most upsetting thing I have ever admitted. There is no reason that I should expect that from something that is supposed to scare me. There is nothing scary about being a woman.

But I implore you to question why seeing women raped, caged, mangled, tortured; why calling bystanders c-words: why is that a form of entertainment? The fact that they were all done by actors has no bearing on the issue. Why is this something there is a demand for?

This attraction is apparently in the top 15 Must See Haunts in the nation according to Haunt Attraction Magazine.  While I believe at one point a man is in fact victimized during the tour, the vast majority are women. Socially, women often represent the extent to which a society is “good:” harm the woman, harm the society.

But I’m not buying it. You cannot tell me that walking me through room after room of simulated rape, imprisonment and mutilation is actually in accordance with a greater social commentary. It is to this company — at is its right to do so — a product. It is entertainment that they are selling. The things in this tour are “haunting,” and they are banking.

Tell me, Haunt Attraction Magazine, why specifically is that haunting? No, really. I want to know. As I woman and human being opposed to violence but perfectly in favor of a good scare, I want to know: why?

Tags: , ,

28 Comments on ““Chambers of Horror” degrades, victimizes women”

  1. Snow Elizabeth November 2, 2011 at 8:12 am #

    You must not watch many horror movies, “Tell me: When did rape become entertainment?” well Ill tell you as far back as Evil Dead, etc etc, If you wanted fluff you should have gone to a haunt at a local church. People attend haunts to experience that frightens us the most which is the loss of control. Rape epitomizes this. Therefore it is scary. Why is it then okay to watch someone get decapitated, eviscerated and mutilated but not violated? What is the difference? Rape is a brutal fact of life. It may strike the reality nerve a bit harder than an ax to the face, but that is only because more people can relate to it.

  2. Torture co. Emissary November 2, 2011 at 9:35 am #

    Hello Ms. Thompson.
    I do apologize that your experience at our twist on modern day gore. It should have been quite obvious that any of the actions or behaviors displayed within our little theater experience are not to be condoned in real life. The point of the experience is to specifically offend and frighten. Biochemically both put you in the fight or flight response the just usually go opposite directions on that scale. We informed you of that quite specifically in the waiver that you signed. It is true that most of our victim staff is female but to be honest that is one of the main reasons people choose our haunt over others. We show horror, depravity with a level of sex/rape and that for some reason sells tickets. Our victim staff willingly become scantly clad in order to bring in more guests. I would also like you to note that we have 2 male victims, one of which specifically gets his prosthetic penis cut off by a woman. The other is in a non sexual and purely shocking scene. We also have scenes in which there is no sex or gore. It saddens me to hear that you did not enjoy our attraction as much as our other patrons. please note that we here at Chambers OF Horror (a Torture Co. affiliate) will be open NOV 4th and 5th for our final performances, tell them that Robert Casey sent you for a discount, and Happy Halloween!

    • Torture Co November 7, 2011 at 2:05 pm #

      Actually there are three spots for specifically male victims every night, three spots for specifically female victims, and three spots where the victim can be of either gender, but tends to be female because that’s what the cast prefers.

  3. Katie R November 2, 2011 at 11:18 am #

    It is my opinion that whether or not actors and actresses are willingly scantily clad, acting at rape and sex, and having prosthetic genitals cut off, it is still disgusting-and I do not mean “disgusting” in a way that befits Halloween and entertainment. I mean it in a way that suggests that the owners, directors, actors/actresses, and especially the patrons who enjoy the attraction have a base, rude, and twisted sense of what is appropriate. From what the Torture Co. Emissary stated about the attraction, it does not show any sense of intelligence, nor of a moral compass. Overall, this is a shameful and perverted attraction, and I would not trust myself alone with anyone who is in any way involved with or enjoys their horror show.

  4. Becca November 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm #

    Everyone has an opinion, if you don’t like something don’t go. People are allowed to make their own choices. The attraction is 18 and over for a reason. I am a woman and I did not feel degraded or victimized in anyway. If that is how you chose to feel than accept your choice. Thanks for the review because I now know I will never read anything written by or associated with Christen Thompson.

  5. "The Kat" November 6, 2011 at 4:35 pm #

    Dear C-word,

    Being that you researched the place before coming (“I almost expected to be called the c-word”), then came, then immediately turned around and wrote this article and posted it as a review on yelp with a link back here it becomes very obvious that you came to Chambers of Horror with an agenda. Frankly your readers should be insulted by your transparency.

    But, I’m sorry to say. I see through you, and I am calling it out. You know your readership here. You knew that a story about a haunted house that depicts violence towards women would get you attention and so you went out and got the story you wanted. If you were offended and upset by the experience, all I can say is that you got what you paid for. Better than that even, you got the story you went looking for. Chambers should have charged you extra. The only thing that I actually question here is how genuine your “outrage” can be, given that you knew what you were getting into.

    In any case I just wanted to poke a little hole in your analysis.

    Believe it or not, there is no patriarchal misogynist conspiracy by the management to degrade women at work here. It’s not even, as you opined, a symbolic “women represent morality in society and by attacking women you attack morality” type of ploy. It’s not even because women are stereotypically victimized in horror movies and thus make handy victims in horror movie inspired scare attractions.

    The real answer is something that some of you are likely to find even more shocking and upsetting then the depictions of (sometimes sexualized) violence at Chambers of Horror.

    The real answer is this:
    Women PREFER to play victims. Girls on the cast are given every opportunity to take on a “torturer” role. The fact is that most of them just don’t want to. This is a horror attraction that takes place up close and personal in a way that no other “haunt” does, it has a sexual edge that no other “haunt” does, and it has a bar outside, like no other haunt does.

    Break it all down and ask “why do the women prefer to be victimized?” and it’s easy to come up with a combination of factors that don’t involve a managerial misogynist conspiracy.

    1. 120 pound girls generally do not feel “scary” to begin with and are generally not known for being outwardly physically aggressive. Trying to “act’ something that you don’t feel is very difficult.

    2. There are a lot of people that come through that are already trying to prove how “tough” they are. They do this by in actors faces and just generally being assholes. A female cast member is going to have a much harder time facing down these assholes then a male one. Particularly since there’s often a component of these assholes leering at every woman in the “haunt”.

    3. EVERY NIGHT SOME DRUNK ASSHOLE GETS THROWN OUT FOR TRYING TO GRAB FEMALE MEMBERS. Very very few women on the cast want to be right up in someones face trying to intimidate them when that comes with a very real possibility of “that guy” grabbing you. This shit happens all the time and I can think of very few things that would make ‘that guy” feel like he’s “beating” the haunted house by proving he’s not scared of it through grabbing a female cast member trying to scare him.

    In summary; Women are much more comfortable being victimized in this pretend environment than they are victimizing. Even to the point where the “victimized” female cast member will suggest and encourage their “victimizer” to make the assault more sexual or sexually degrading than the scene was originally intended. The girls on the cast know how to go for shock value, that’s what we do because we LIKE to do it that way. Also, women on the cast are ironically more protected from genuine assault by patrons by staying back behind their “torturers” and being tied up or in a cage.

    You seem to favor yourself a forward thinking feminist, but I’m a female, and a feminist, too; and from where I am sitting you sound more like an old prude that uses binoculars to peep into her neighbors windows to catch a glimpse of them spanking each other so she can gossip about how morally repugnant they are for flaunting their perversions.

    All I got to say is, damn, bltch, so what if I like to wear a leash and be called a dirty little sIut from time to time. If you don’t like it, than quit spying on my shlt.

    • bhu November 7, 2011 at 8:42 pm #

      I don’t think you should call someone a “b****” for expressing an opinion you disagree with. That’s not very mature behavior.

      I also don’t think the author of this article was saying that there is a “patriarchal misogynist conspiracy by the management to degrade women.” I think she was critiquing the content, that she saw a lot of violence specifically targeted towards women, that part of the entertainment was humiliation the women in the audience by calling them the c-word. While she was specifically critiquing “Chamber of Horrors,” I also feel like she was critiquing society as a whole for enjoying this type of entertainment which specifically targeted women.

      I also disagree with the idea you have that the author came to “Chamber of Horrors” seeking a sensationalist story to write. I think she went expecting to be scared and entertained, and I feel like, from the article, that the author came out more shocked and humiliated by her experience as well as by what she saw. She wrote this to give voice to her experience and to critique why such extreme violence towards women was being portrayed as entertainment. To attack her personally for expressing her experience and opinion is really uncalled for.

      • "The Kat" November 7, 2011 at 11:17 pm #

        I directly quote the author here: “The worst part of all of this is that I wasn’t surprised. I almost expected to see women raped, tortured and imprisoned; I almost expected to be called the c-word.”

        The author makes it quite clear that she had expectations about what she was walking into that included being witness to pretend sexualized violence and possibly being called names. If she expected these things then she can not very well be genuinely outraged that her expectations were fulfilled. If she knew what she was getting into and the idea of it bothered her than she shouldn’t have gone through. Couple the fact that her own words admit that she expected these things to happen and still went, with the fact that she favors herself as a writer/editor and needed something to write about (and sensationalist controvery sells journalism, oh yes) and the only reasonable assumption based on facts is that she wanted to be “offended”. That’s called getting what you paid for.

        She wasn’t tricked into thinking she was going to a kids haunted house with animations spiders. She sought out “atlanta’s most extreme R rated ADULTS ONLY horror attraction” She signed a waiver that explicitly stated that Chambers has realistic depictions of real world gore and violence and is meant to upset and shock. She probably received a verbal warning that the place was over the top horrific, and then she stood in line with clearly visible signs warning that the content inside was extremely graphic in nature.

        She either knew what she was getting into and sought to go through with it to write about it, or she somehow managed to wind up there in complete ignorance. If the latter then I can only wonder how she managed to make it through every room of the place without being so upset and offended that she didn’t turn around and leave since the first room typically contains a mostly naked woman begging for help and shortly thereafter patrons are welcomed by another actor that insults everyone that walks through the door. I don’t buy that she was there in ignorance. You know what happens when people are genuinely offended by something like this? They turn around and walk out the way they came. They don’t subject themselves to a 25 minute barrage of having their delicate sensibilities assaulted in every conceivable manner.

        My magic 8 ball says “All signs point to an agenda.”

        In any case, the women that work at Chambers of Horror PREFER to play victim roles. The females on cast are not “degraded” nor are they “victims”. They are VOLUNTEERS that are having FUN trying to shock and offend. If there seems to be a distinct slant towards the victimization of women it is only because the female cast wants to play that way for reasons I outlined already.

        Given that the author actually included very little “social commentary” in this review but instead chose to write about how “upset and offended” she was and make assumptions about the reason why most of the pretend victims are female I think you’re idea that this review was mostly about “social commentary” is way off base.

        PS: When someone takes it upon themselves to publish their *opinion* publicly than they open themselves up for criticism like this. She gave her opinion on her experience? I gave my opinion on the experience of reading her article as well as the motivations of why she would write it the way she did. That is a completely valid response to an editorial. Also I did not actually call her a bitch. I followed my comparison of the author to an old prude with a playful metaphorical response to the idea of being spied on by a neighbor looking to be offended.

        I did actually insinuate that she was a “c-word”, however. I hope it was appropriately offensive.

    • "ej" November 7, 2011 at 9:53 pm #

      Violence against women is not entertainment. Your response is despicable and you should be ashamed of yourself.

      • "The Kat" November 7, 2011 at 11:38 pm #

        “Violence against women is not entertainment. Your response is despicable and you should be ashamed of yourself.”

        Are you suggesting by contrast that violence against men is a more acceptable form of entertainment? Being that men are actually much more at risk for serious injury or death through violence in the United States I’d have to suggest that violence against men is just as much a societal concern as violence against women. In fact, in almost all mass-consumption entertainment media men are much more often victims of violence than are women. Men are brutally maimed and killed by the thousands on TV and in movies, comics, books, video games. Have you ever enjoyed an action movie, or even a movie with action in it? Then you’ve probably enjoyed depictions of violence against men. Check yourself and make sure that you don’t have double standards before you call me despicable.

        No one at Chambers is condoning or encouraging actual violence. We’re portraying characters that are meant to unsettle and shock. That’s a horror tradition. It’s not for everyone but some of us got tired of stories about ghosts that jump out and say BOO around 3rd grade or so.

    • guest November 7, 2011 at 11:45 pm #

      uh, no sir

      that being intelligent thing, you’re doing it wrong

      • "The Kat" November 8, 2011 at 12:25 am #

        If you’re addressing me it’s “No, Ma’am” .

        Also, that whole stealing faux-witty remarks like “you’re doing it wrong” from internet memes doesn’t paint a flattering picture of your own intelligence. Frankly between “you’re doing it wrong” and “violence against women is not entertainment” I’m wondering if you’re actually capable of original thought or if your most impressive trick is parroting others.

  6. debbiesue77 November 6, 2011 at 4:43 pm #

    CHRISTEN THOMPSON IS ACTUALLY THE MOST AMAZING WRITER EVER. This review is phenomenal and I for one fully support it. Call me old fashion, but I come from a day and age where rape is something not to be joked about. Nor, should a woman ever be degraded by calling her inappropriate names. Halloween is suppose to promote scary activities but this crosses a line of depravity. And clearly your cranium is so far up your Buttocks (that’s right I am so classy I will not dignify the arrogant commentaries on this post with my normal dose of profanity.) that you refuse to open your eyes and see that this review reflects the opinions of multiple people. You sir clearly need to update yourself on what constitutes as appropriate horror because you are an idiot. And if anyone disagrees with the fabulous Christen Thompson, then you may want to examine yourself and see what makes you think that this type of behavior is appropriate for a haunted house. As for me, I am going to tell everyone how fabulous this review by Christen is, and I will tell everyone I know never to support this appalling establishment.

    • "The Kat" November 7, 2011 at 11:50 pm #

      “As for me, I am going to tell everyone how fabulous this review by Christen is, and I will tell everyone I know never to support this appalling establishment.”

      Yes, please, go out and tell everyone how shockingly depraved Chambers of Horror is and what a horrible disturbing thing it was. I strongly encourage you to print out this review and distribute it to everyone you know, maybe you could even post it around town next halloween in highly visible areas because that would definitely not be a perfect way to advertise Chambers of Horror. In fact, I beg you not to do this because you will definitely drive them out of business rather then just turning yourself into an easy promotional device.

      Maybe you could march behind their float in the halloween parades next year screaming “Hell no! We wont go! We wont go to Torture.Co!”

      Wait, no, I mean please DON’T do that because you definitely wouldn’t just sell tickets that way. Your plan to tell everyone to avoid Chambers of Horror is true genius. Run with it!

      • Melanie November 9, 2011 at 11:21 am #

        My goodness, woman, stop trolling everything.

  7. bhu November 7, 2011 at 8:52 pm #

    I think you’ve go a really interesting critique going on here specifically about “Chamber of Horrors” and more generally about a society which enjoys this sort of entertainment. I’m personally of the opinion that you can be scared in a way which is not hateful towards women or humiliating to the audience. The fact that people there repeated called you the c-word is really horrible. That’s not scary, and I don’t think anyone would sign up for that sort of humiliation. It seems like a cheap and stupid way to shock. I think haunted houses are supposed to show the unrealistic fears we all have, like giant man eating spiders or crazy zombie serial killers. I think the whole depiction of rape may have been especially shocking because that happens every day to women all around us. It’s hard to dissociate from something like that which could happen to any woman at any time, a very realistic fear versus an unrealistic one.

    • "The Kat" November 8, 2011 at 12:04 am #

      Actually there isn’t any real “rape” going on. There is a part where someone pretend shoves a pretend shotgun into someone’s hind end and pretends to shoot them in an orifice or maybe the taint and then water blows out of a pneumatic device to heighten the effect. I think there is one other room where sometimes there is a guy that talks about how he’s going to stick a meathook in his victims coochie.

      There is a sexual edge here but that is still only two rooms out of almost a dozen or so featuring anything remotely similar to rape. Even then a shotgun up the hind end is so silly and over the top that it’s frankly quite comical and the meathook thing is pretty damn silly, too. Especially since the gentleman in question has a meathook in one hand and a giant dildo on a stick in the other.

      Doesnt sound quite so realistic now, does it?

      PS: On any given night the “victims” in these scenarios might be men getting a meathook or a shotgun up the booty-hole. Does that make it more acceptable?

  8. Kristina L. November 7, 2011 at 10:25 pm #

    My concern about this situation is not with this haunted house but with the fact that Programming Board at Agnes Scott decided it was a good idea to go. I in no way condone the “Chambers of Horror” operation, but I do think people are free to spend their time and money as they please. And apparently, “depravity with a level of sex/rape” sells tickets. My real concern is that this haunted house was not thoroughly researched before ProBo extended the invitation (at least, it seems that way).

    I was at the Little Five Points Halloween parade (which The Profile covered), and the “Chambers of Horror” had a float which I found truly disturbing. I literally had to look away. I also looked at their website after seeing the ProBo advertisements, which made it obvious that the haunted house was horrendous. I knew that this was something I did not want to see and was ashamed that ProBo encouraged people to support it by purchasing tickets.

    I think this event should be a learning experience for Programming Board and the community of Agnes Scott. Look before we leap. Our real power is as consumers and we need to exercise it.

  9. Kristen November 7, 2011 at 10:28 pm #

    “We show horror, depravity with a level of sex/rape and that for some reason sells tickets.” While I appreciate the honesty of Torture co. (And with a name like that…) I cannot believe that our school endorsed this by offering discounted tickets. I was unfortunate enough to see Chamber of Horror’s float at the Five Points Parade, and I actively declined the offer to attend the haunted house.

    I’m saddened that we live in a society that still finds the idea of rape entertaining. It does not placate me to know that at one point in the haunted house a man has his genitals severed. That doesn’t change the fact that the majority of exhibits show women being tortured! And for that matter since when is sexually abusing men alright? Rape, in any form, should not be condoned! It is not acceptable! There are many things that can be terrifying without resorting to sexism (or any other -ism for that matter).

    I am also disgusted with “The Kat”‘s comments. I got the impression she is an employee of Chamber of Horrors. I don’t think the author is attention seeking, simply reflecting on her experiences. What the female actors choose as their roles is of little consequence to the argument as stated by the article above. It doesn’t matter that the actors consented or even preferred their roles. What matters is the subject matter dealt with by the attraction in general that we are calling into question. I also don’t think it is okay to attack Christen personally. Disagree all you want, you are just as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. But when the attacks become personal it is difficult to take you seriously.

    • "The Kat" November 8, 2011 at 12:14 am #

      “I am also disgusted with “The Kat”‘s comments. I got the impression she is an employee of Chamber of Horrors.”

      I’m glad that me very bluntly saying I am on the cast gave you the “impression” that I’m an employee.

      If I told you that your statement about being “placated” by the knowledge that there is a depiction of a man having his wiener snipped off made you come across as a hypocrite would you get the “impression” that I don’t hold your opinions in high regard?

      • Kristen November 8, 2011 at 9:06 am #

        In what way is that hypocritical? I would really love to know your argument for this. I mean that seriously, if I am in any way being hypocritical I want to know.

      • "The Kat" November 8, 2011 at 5:33 pm #

        Condemning pretend violence and then being placated by pretend violence based strictly on the gender of the victim is either hypocritical or sexist. I suppose you might just be a sexist misandrist which wouldn’t necessarily be hypocritical but it would certainly be scorn worthy.

      • Kristen November 8, 2011 at 11:43 pm #

        That makes more sense. Reread the comment.

        “It does NOT placate me to know that at one point in the haunted house a man has his genitals severed [...] And for that matter since when is sexually abusing men alright? Rape, in any form, should not be condoned!”

        My argument is the exact opposite of that.

      • The Kat November 9, 2011 at 5:50 am #

        I actually feel better now that I see my misread. Mea Culpa.

        Though that being said I think that people seem to be taking Chambers of Horror way to seriously. It’s very graphic but it’s so over the top in its gratuitousness that it’s more silly than anything. Spiritually, it’s more like Mortal Kombat than it is like Saw.

  10. wha November 7, 2011 at 11:42 pm #

    So I found the author’s review appropriate and informative. Now, let’s talk about how the fact that by saying shit like “rape is a reality deal with it” and “we do rape and gore because it sells”, the ignorance of the majority of society is revealed. by making or supporting such comments you only demonstrate how little you know in regards to the actual suffering and fear that such events inspire, and show a blatant disrespect towards the victims and survivors of such acts by belittling their experiences into a gross form of entertainment. and this is me saying this politely.

    and you know what, yeah, people can have their precious little opinions that’s cool–but why don’t you think really hard about how events such as genocides and mass murders have occurred throughout history. i’ll give you a hint: there were some people who had some opinions, and they were allowed to make their own choices. i’m just saying. i can get behind the whole you’re entitled to your own opinion, but i’m getting tired of this whole “there’s no such thing as a wrong opinion” crap mentality that seems to be taking over as of late. or maybe i’m just an idiot who doesn’t get it, but then that’s why i’m a misanthrope in all honesty

  11. Heather November 10, 2011 at 3:57 pm #

    I appreciate this review. I love horror as much as the next gal, especially those that are B rated! However, I never found rape or anything in that nature to elicit a frightened response, mostly just disgust. I have worked as a Rape Crisis Volunteer for a year now and I could definitely tell anyone some stories that, if that’s what scares them, would keep them up at night. Mayhaps that is why the idea of rape, of any sex, is revolting. In light of this review I’m assured that my first haunted house experience will be with Netherworld!

  12. Jarko Deatin February 3, 2012 at 12:21 pm #

    “It is in part a nostalgic holiday where one can be whatever they want, and in another an opportunity where one may be scared to wit’s end and receive no grief for it.”

    -actually its a pagan holiday celebrating the end of harvest and the comming of winter, but thats a secret they hide in books, not an one’s own opnion so I’ll come back to that.

    “This horror house should not be qualified as mass entertainment, let alone something that anyone, regardless of gender, politics or awareness should condone.”

    -yeah, free speech and expression unless YOU don’t approve, right?

    “Tell me: When did calling a woman the c-word — whether or not she signed a waiver — become entertaining?”

    -the moment the C-word posted the written proof that darwin was wrong at the top of this page…….

    “I signed a waiver at this event so I could be allowed in. But the fact that I signed this waiver should not indicate that I, a paying customer, can be personally degraded.”

    -WTF?!?!?!?!?! are you SERIOUS?! do you attend agnes scott or morehouse? cause I’m sorry baby, but YES, here in the real world of ADULTS, signing ANYTHING isn’t indication, is called PROOF that you agree to what’s stated above in writting, let alone in BOLD UNDERLINED LETTERS!

    “Socially, women often represent the extent to which a society is “good:” harm the woman, harm the society”

    -Mark fuhrman, michael richards, Dan Quayle. jessica simpson AND HER DAD would appalud the foot-in-mouth STUPIDITY of that….. wow, you have out done your self.

    “Tell me, Haunt Attraction Magazine, why specifically is that haunting? No, really. I want to know. As I woman and human being opposed to violence but perfectly in favor of a good scare, I want to know: why?”

    - I’ll tell you why, ready? Cause of people like you….. people reguardless of gender, race, creed or educaion, but people like you. People who have seen nothing in life, but for one reason or another seem to think they have a greater understanding of the world. we have to go a step further, ghost noises and campy costumes dosen’t make an impact. you said it yourself, you expected it. you weren’t suprised and you paid anyway. you complain about violence against women and then skip right over half the paper to read the story about the rape the night before. you reference horror movies in a demeaning manner but you slow down at the car wreck. because the things we depict don’t haunt you, they entertain you….. theres the real scare

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: