Bleats

Props To The Lion Who Didn't Kill This Intruder Hoping For Insta Fame

This is NOT the effing Lion King.

There are some basic rules of society that the majority of us follow without question. Obvious things, like wearing clothes in public and not coughing on the person next to you.

Over the weekend, a woman entered a lion’s enclosure at the Bronx Zoo. She proceeded to dance in front of the animal and clearly gives zero f*cks about basic human etiquette.

The clip, which was posted to Instagram by a bystander, shows the woman standing a few metres in front of the massive feline while she taunts it with her hands in an attempt to gain its attention.

The most baffling component of the whole thing is that she appears incredibly calm even as the lion moves closer. The whole thing begs the question: does she know that lions are not giant, domesticated cats?

This was not a “meow” situation.
Credit: 30 Rock

Unfortunately, this event is just one in a series of baffling zoo break-ins. Remember that awful incident back in 2016, when a man attempted suicide in a Chilean zoo by flinging himself into a lion’s enclosure? The two lions ended up mauling him and while the man came out alive, the animals were shot dead.

I got a few questions, I do. But before going there, can we just talk about how effing calm the lion appears in front of this lady? It literally cannot be arsed by her ridiculous attempt at fame. A zoo spokesperson has highlighted just how dangerous the whole sitch was, telling CNN:

“This action was a serious violation and unlawful trespass that could have resulted in serious injury or death.”

My theory is that the only reason this woman hasn’t posted anything online herself, is because the cops are now after her. Regardless, she’s received her two seconds of fame via someone else’s ‘gram and I have just one more question for her: was it all worth it, silly woman?

Are you?!
Credit: Hyper RPG

Not only did she risk her own life but she disregarded the emotional wellbeing of others. Zoos are very public places and I can guarantee that no one would have enjoyed watching a human being mauled to death.

According to the NYPD, the Bronx Zoo have filed a complaint for criminal trespass. There’s little doubt, however, that they’ll find this woman with only one measly video of her zoo crime.

The Bloke Who Made The First Labradoodle Litter Regrets Playing God

He's called his creation "Frankenstein’s monster".

They say a good person is one who can own up to their mistakes and that’s exactly what the inventor of the Labradoodle has done.

Australian man Wally Conron has referred to his creation of the Labradoodle as “Frankenstein’s monster”. He told the ABC that the doggos are “either crazy or have hereditary problems”. A tad shocking considering poodle-cross breeds are a common choice amongst dog-lovers, especially those who can’t handle hair.

Conron originally bred the first Labrador and poodle cross in 1989 for a blind woman whose spouse was allergic to dog hair. He’d intended on creating an allergy-friendly guide dog, a choice he now deeply regrets.

Post-creation of the Frankenstein floof.

Conron, a former breeding manager with the Royal Guide Dog Association of Australia, feels as though by producing the first litter of this crossbreed he inspired the creation of other poodle-cross creations. And now he fears people are over-breeding.

Poodle-cross pooches might be incredibly popular now, but Conron told the ABC that the leftover puppies from his original litter weren’t easy to give away. He turned to the guide dog association’s PR team to encourage people to adopt them.

He said he realised what he’d done “within a matter of days”. 

“When I’m out and I see these Labradoodles I can’t help myself, I go over them in my mind,” he said.

Which has me wondering: do problematic breed-buyers ever feel a similar pang of guilt? Have the human parents of pugs, bulldogs and French bulldogs simply chosen to glaze over the information about how it’s probs not a good idea to support the production of these breeds?

Are people just ignoring the facts?

Vets themselves have even dubbed these dogs “anatomical disasters”. One vet anonymously wrote to the Guardian: “every structure that should make up the nose [of brachycephalic dogs] has been squashed flat.”

It’s safe to assume that most people at least perform a quick Google search before purchasing a breed. Is this just a case of wilful ignorance? The only thing I’m wilfully ignoring is the fact that one human year doesn’t actually equal 7 dog years.

Yes, Conron the labradoodle maker made a mistake, but at least he’s owned up to it – can we really say the same about buyers of boujee breeds?

Turns Out Defending Yourself Against An Armed Criminal With A Coffee Jar Is A Really Bad Idea

A classic case of gun vs jar - we've all been there.

An Australian man has decided to defend himself against an armed carjacker by using a jar of instant coffee. 

Jason, 48, was on a ciggie and coffee run on Tuesday night at a service station in Frankston, Victoria, according to 7 News. When he approached his Mercedes Benz after the purchase, a stranger appeared, pointing a gun at his face. 

Now, you’d think Jason would have just dropped everything and made no sudden movements- but what does he do?

He steps back and, according to 7 News, says: “No, you’re not getting my keys.” Big, bold and very risky, to say the least.

You just shouldn’t f**k with guns, guys.

Apparently Jason then kicked the man and hit him over the head with his jar of coffee. The perpetrator responded by whacking him on the head with his firearm. A classic case of coffee jar vs gun. We’ve all been there.

Keep in mind, this life-risking situation was all for a pack of ciggies, Nescafe Blend 43 and a fancy car.

It all has me wondering: why is it that some people respond so passively in crisis situations while others go full-on turbo, taking on an armed man with nothing but instant coffee?

Jason, after all, did say: “I think most people probably should hand the keys over, but I’m sort of not one of those people.” 

Jason, but make it Mean Girls.

Most people think they have what it takes to survive a crisis, according to disaster expert Anie Kalayjian, who says that, in reality, most of us actually panic to some degree and are far more excitable than what we envision. That image you have of yourself being cool, calm and collected in a situation of danger? Probably inaccurate.

Kalayjian also states that people who place an emphasis on material items may not fare well in times of trouble. You’re actually less likely to panic if your purpose and meaning in life is more than your worldly possessions- you’re less likely to be concerned about material loss. 

Perhaps that’s the takeaway here: your life is far more important than risking a potentially fatal gunshot wound.

The attacker, reported to have been wearing ear warmers (an interesting choice for a criminal), eventually left the scene with nothing but Jason’s pack of ciggies. Really, it just doesn’t get more Australian than that. 

“Didn’t get the Benz, boys, but check out these durries!”

Pop-up Channel

Follow Us