December 18, 2014

Midweek Monkery 5/1/13

monks ale

luther-shadesNEW FEATURE!

Hey, your Chaplain understands that the weeks get long. You make it to Wednesday morning and you’re starting to feel weary. As MacDonald’s used to say, you deserve a break today, and I am ready to oblige. Over the course of a week, I run across so many funny things that I would love to share with you, so yours truly decided that Wednesday morning might be the perfect time to highlight a few of them.

I hereby declare Wednesday morning “Midweek Monkery” time. From this point on until further notice, when you open up IM on Wednesdays, you will find a few items that have made me chuckle. It is hoped that this will thereby lighten your load a bit, and make your journey all the easier.

So, without further ado, let’s enjoy a bit of Monkery.

* * *

luther-shadesFunniest Prayer of the Week

Kylie Bisutti was a Victoria’s Secret model. Not that I would know about this, of course, except for an article in the Christian Post describing why she decided to quit said modeling gig. Apparently she got cold…uh…feet parading around in her underwear and decided it might not best way to live for God and honor her husband. Ya think?

Well, give her credit, but I have to share this with you. On a day that proved to be a turning point in her career, she uttered one of the funniest prayers I’ve heard in some time:

“God, why did you have me win the Victoria’s Secret Angel competition if it was going to make me feel this way? I’m not honoring my husband. I just want answers!”

No, I'm not going to put up those pictures.

No, I’m not going to put up those pictures.

What do we learn from this?

  1. That God was behind her winning the Victoria’s Secret contest. (John Piper aside, I’m not sure. Is Victoria’s Secret a young, restless, and reformed company?)
  2. That Kylie wasn’t astute enough at one point to realize that modeling skimpy underwear in public might not be the best choice for a young Christian woman and newlywed. (Who knew?)
  3. That… oh, I don’t know, this makes my brain hurt.

At any rate, if you want to know more of the saga of the nearly naked babe who got confused about why she felt bad being nearly naked all the time, you can (of course! — this is America after all) read her upcoming book: I’m No Angel: From Victoria’s Secret Model to Role Model.

Oh, and in case you hadn’t guessed, she is now focused on creating a Christian clothing line, doing speaking tours and writing her blog: www.imnoangel.org.

Yeah, go ahead and look at her blog. She didn’t post any underwear pictures, dang it.

luther-shades

Where Is Dave Ramsey When You Need Him?

Poor Henry Gribbohm. Who could have guessed that carnival games were not a good investment?

Apparently this guy from Epsom, NH went to Manchester and thought his ship had come in when he spotted the “Tubs of Fun” ball toss game at the carnival he was attending. Zoop! Before he could say, “D’oh!” poor Henry had lost $300 trying to win an X-Box Kinect for his kids ($199.99 at your local Best Buy).

That’s when he made his big mistake.

It seems Henry went home and emptied out his savings account of an additional $2300 and came back to play more “Tubs of Fun.” And he lost it all. Oh, wait, he did win a big stuffed banana with dreadlocks. And they did give him a little of his money back.

At last report, he was still looking for his dignity.

 

 

Finally, a word about the culture wars from one of our favorite cartoon commentaries, Coffee with Jesus. I call it “Blessed are the Faux Persecuted?” (From Radio Free Babylon)

Coffee with Jesus war

 

Thanks for dropping by. Enjoy your Wednesday!

Comments

  1. Gerald says:

    And what exactly is wrong with being an underwear model…? Is Christ offended by nudity, or by underwear?

    “Hello, Kylie? This is God. In answer to your question, I was going to make you an investment banker, but your future husband prayed to marry a Victoria’s Secret model.”

    • Damaris says:

      :-)

    • Maybe the funniest comment ever. Thanks for the smile, Gerald. I guess Kylie got her answer.

    • Marcus Johnson says:

      +1

    • Joseph (the original) says:

      :)

    • Rick Ro. says:

      Yes, definitely one of the top 5 comments ever made on a blog site.

    • Funny!!!

    • Gerald says:

      Thank you all for your kind words!

      That first part was serious, though. What’s wrong with being an underwear model? I’ve known models, and most will do any work that’s offered them. (Some refuse alchohol ads.)

      If the point is that scantily-clad women excite lust, well, my Iranian friend once confessed that American women drove him wild, what with their revealing clothing and all. I asked him if he noticed the women back in Iran, where they cover up from head to toe. He admitted that yes, he looked at them the same way. So it’s all relative. If went to a nudist colony, we’d adjust to that as well.

      • Robert F says:

        Here goes. The modelling business is part of a popular culture that deals in unreality. The models that take the runways and command the cameras are positioned by advertisers as physical role models for what women should look like, even though most women do not and can not look like them, and the pervasive presence of these artificial and unrealistic standards of beauty have a negative effect on the way girls and young women see themselves, measuring their own value and worth by what is actually a somewhat freakish ideal that we have all been brainwashed into thinking is normal and desirable. The issue isn’t nudity or the possibility that exposure of female flesh will make a man explode in uncontrollable paroxysms of lust; the issue is that the mainstream modelling business at its highest level inculcates in men and women alike a horribly uncharitable and unloving attitude to women’s bodies as they actually are, and breeds an insensitivity to the real beauty that God has given every human body, and every human being. As far as how modesty plays into this, modesty is the recognitions that the beauty that all women, and men, have is not there own possession, but a gift given by God to be stewarded in humility and thankfulness no less than any other gift. This does not preclude art, or fashions, that let that beauty shine; but it does involve mercy and gentleness in the way that beauty is shared. The high fashion modelling industry lack all such mercy and gentleness; it’s simply exploitative and crass.

        • Amen and Amen and Amen. Gerald, I take your point, but Robert Nails it here.

        • Gerald says:

          By that standard, we should be offended by Superman.

          Okay, I understand complaints about encouraging anorexia, but would it solve the problem if models with a wider range of body types were hired? Or is the issue that underwear sold by Victoria’s Secret is too sexy, and that no good can come of this? Or is it okay to sell sexy underwear, but not to market it through color photographs which might seduce weak-minded males into committing the solitary sin? I am trying to fathom how underwear is supposed to be marketed in the ideal Christian world of, say, the future South Carolina of christianexodus.org.

          What about shoes? Does footwear raise any red flags–for example, by tormenting foot fetishists with lustful thoughts?

          • Damaris says:

            The real perversion is the advertising aspect, not the nudity. Bodies, are good, sex is good, but the sleazy capitalization of both or either for profit is nasty.

          • Robert F says:

            The advertising aspect depends on creating the subtext that beauty and sexiness is a scarce commodity owned by only a few; that’s why you will never really see widespread use of models with a wider range of body types, because it defeats the idea that beauty is rare, and thereby would undermine the whole point of the endeavor. Victoria Secret advertising fosters the idea that beauty is rare and hard to achieve, hard to access, and artificial; the whole point is to cut many women out of the definition of what is beautiful, not include them.

          • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

            And get them to spend piles of money to get themselves into that definition.

            Helps if men are locked into that definition and that definition alone.

        • Pattie says:

          Robert, THANK YOU for your post…..it is awesome to hear this from a man other than my darling husband, who looks at these starved and surgically enhanced women and usually says….”Would someone PLEASE get that girl a donut?!”

          My theory is that way back when, men only saw the real women who lived nearby, in all of their glorious diversity and shapes and sizes. Beauty had a basis in reality.. But from the first illustrations in “Godry’s Ladies’ Book” of fashions in the 18th century through to our pixelated models and “stars”, men and women were TOLD what beauty looked like. Now, thanks to the wonders of surgery, we are bombarded with the sight of freakishly tall and skinny women with enormous breasts. In the real world, women with large busts are almost always curvy all over, and do NOT have the pelvis and hips of a fourteen year old boy.

          I spent far too many years trying to look different from the way God and my DNA meant me to be, despite the love and admiration of the first man in my life (my Dad) and then later my boyfriend~fiance~husband, who assured me he LIKED my curves just FINE!! We need to make sure our daughters and granddaughters understand that God meant them to be healthy and active….not to starve and hate themselves!

          • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

            In the real world, women with large busts are almost always curvy all over, and do NOT have the pelvis and hips of a fourteen year old boy.

            Among Furry artists, the latter standard of Sex-Ay is called “Auschwitz Survivor with Two Basketballs.” It is NOT a mark of a good (or female) artist.

          • The fashion industry is dominated by those who prefer men over women and prefer the bodies of 12 year old boys with breasts attached rather than a real woman.

          • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

            So you’ve heard that one, too. The version I heard in the Seventies was “The fashion industry is dominated by male homosexuals who hate women and have a vested interest in making women look ugly. Female models are chosen to match the ultimate sexual fantasies of these fashion bigwigs — boys starting puberty.” (At the time, the Big Fashion Trend for Women on the runways was SS Dress Blacks with the hook-crosses removed and 1920s men’s fashion worn as sloppy as possible.)

        • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

          Here goes. The modelling business is part of a popular culture that deals in unreality.

          Go to YouTube and check out the following videos:

          1) My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic, Season 1 Episode 20, “Green Isn’t Your Color” (the full 22-minute version)

          2) The fan-made music video based on characters and situations from the episode, “Picture Perfect Pony.” (The “Official Music Video” version.)

  2. Danielle says:

    Is that hipster Martin?

    • Justin says:

      No facial hair and he’s not listening to Jonathan Rundman (or KLOVE ironically), so probably not.

      • I still have the KLove theme song going around in my head after all these years. It’s kind of like herpes…once you have it you have ti for life. :-D

  3. Headless Unicorn Guy says:

    At any rate, if you want to know more of the saga of the nearly naked babe who got confused about why she felt bad being nearly naked all the time, you can (of course! — this is America after all) read her upcoming book: I’m No Angel: From Victoria’s Secret Model to Role Model.

    Let’s see… Christian Celebrity Testimony with Juicy hook, probably ghostwritten like most celeb autobios…

    Oh, and in case you hadn’t guessed, she is now focused on creating a Christian™ clothing line,

    “Just like Victoria’s Secret, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”?

    This is Reality Show material. (Any CHRISTIAN(TM) Reality Show planned for this?)
    This is South Park.
    This is SO predictable.
    This is SO American Evangelical Bubble.

  4. I give some credit to ms kylie for discovering that God actually desires lifestyle changes as well as ‘heart’ changes in a Christ-follower as a witness to His counter-cultural kingdom…but how about taking it the next step and keeping it out of the public/societal limelight? Share the testimony, encourage others to do likewise but within your church walls or living room small group gathering or the girlfriends at the coffehouse… just a thought, maybe too harsh… as HUG implicates – it’s such a good picture of our convoluted evangelical culture – so wrong and right all mixed together…

    • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

      Evangelical or Mainstream, it’s all CELEBRITY-driven Culture. And Ms Kylie (with her Juicy/”Naughty” background) is prime candidate for being fast-tracked as a Christian CELEBRITY. (After all, Jon & Kate Plus Eight‘s Christian Testimony celeb autobio got pulled from the shelves, gotta replace it with something.)

      And puts Ms Kylie in danger of Celebrity Burnout once her 15 minutes are over.

  5. Clay Knick says:

    Mike,

    This has to be, no, it is, one of the best ever here on IMonk. Some things are just too funny!

  6. Funny stuff, and both stories are certainly stranger than fiction. You really can’t make this stuff up. The analytical part of me has a couple of thoughts.

    1) I’m guessing neither of these people are going to join Mensa any time soon.

    2) I’m also guessing Ms. Bisutti has a deep underlying need to get noticed. From the looks of it the manifestations of that have simply shifted from the secular culture to the Evangelical culture. It may be well-intentioned but I’m not sure it solves the problem, or even makes the world better than it might have been for having a real Christian witness in the underwear modeling world.

    The rest of me just wants to sort of shake my head, and laugh..

  7. Peace From The Fringes says:

    Something about the tone of this rubs me wrong. Perhaps it’s because I live at the beach and everyone, from babies to grannies, walks around in bathing suits. There is no moral value placed on skin. Our virtue doesn’t reside in the inches-to-cloth ratio we display on any given sunny day.

    Our husbands are honored just fine, thank you very much.

    This feels like Christianese sub-culture shaming with a side order of snark.

    Sorry if I misinterpreted but …. yuck!

    • Believe it or not, most guys struggle with lust of the eyes. Should us guys learn to deal and look away when tempted? Yes. But the ladies would be doing us a favor if they chose the one piece over the thong. Just sayin…

      • Rick Ro. says:

        This is a interesting “how we were created” issue for me. Yes, most of us guys struggle with lust of the eyes. We can’t help it, really. And what is the responsibility of the woman? Not sure.

        I often share this analogy with people…

        At Safeco Field here in Seattle where the Mariners play, the vendors sell garlic fries. The smell of garlic fries permeates the air; the scent cannot be ignored. If I view Safeco Field as “the world” and the smell of garlic fries as “women,” I can’t avoid the smell and enticement of garlic fries. It hits me the moment I walk into the stadium, it’s there for three full hours. I like the smell. It’s pleasing. I like to eat garlic fries. But I know that eating garlic fries is wrong. I’m married to a beautiful garlic fry, I’m only supposed to love her and only her. I shouldn’t let myself be attracted to other garlic fries. Why can’t the other garlic fries smell like three-week old gym socks and look like moldy bread? Shouldn’t they change the way they smell and look, so that I don’t drool over them? (By the way, this tends to be the Islamic approach – make the “tempter” change their appearance, since men can’t help themselves.)

        “Ah,” you say, “if you struggle with the temptation of the garlic fry, then don’t go to Safeco Field.”

        The problem with that is that God calls me/us to enter the world for Him. He says, “Rick, I want you to go to Safeco Field and share the good news about the water of life. By the way, you shouldn’t eat any garlic fries. Again…it’s important that you share the news about the water of life, but it’s equally important that you not eat garlic fries.”

        So the questions are:
        Can a man enter Safeco Field without smelling the garlic fries? No.
        Can a man walk through the world without viewing a pretty woman? No.
        Should Safeco Field stop selling garlic fries just so I won’t be tempted by them? No.
        Should a woman stop looking pretty just so I won’t be tempted by her? Umm…No?
        What is MY responsibiity regarding garlic fries? Figure out a way to take in the scent, yet not succumb.
        What is My responsibility regarding pretty women? Figure out a way to take in the view, yet not succumb.

        How? Not sure of that answer. We know that all men tend to get tempted as we walk through the world, and but for the grace of God, right now I have not succumbed. But better men than me have.

        • How many women are walking around Safeco in bathing suits? Maybe I need to go to a Marinergame this year. :)

          I think there’s a difference between women “looking pretty” at the ball game and walking around almost naked at the beach. I think this goes beyond Christianese subculture. It makes it easier for men to stumble. Lets just say I won’t be “witnessing” at a beach or strip club any time soon.

          • This probably belongs under in the “Imonk Monkey” section you suggested below Rick, but I am reminded that I actually DID tell as stripper how much God loves her and has life for her outside of stripping. Somehow I feel my witness was compromised after I tipped her.

          • Around here, it is extremely common for people in bathing suits to be in grocery stores, gas stations, etc. Part of life. Nobody squeals much about “stumbling” or “guarding” or any of the other catch-phrases that are ubiquitous in the Christian evangelical sub-culture.

            Also, let it be known that women are big, big fans of “garlic fries”. I personally spend a disproportionate part of my day thinking about them. That’s not my neighbors’ problem and I’d be embarrassed to transfer the workings of my mind onto their choice of clothing.

          • You are right. The onus is on me and no one else.

        • Rick, after reading your comment, I’ve decided I may never go to a baseball game again without having garlic fries.

        • Rick Ro, your garlic fries analogy is a lot like Brennan Manning’s in Ragamuffin Gospel. He tells about going to Yankee Stadium for a baseball game when he was a good Catholic kid in the 1950s. It was a Friday, and he wanted a hot dog. Not allowed for good Catholic kids on Fridays. He describes the difference between mortal sin and venial sin, and when one crosses over into the other. Hugely complicated, even without eating a hot dog, and more complicated when he did. Long and short of it, the hot dog may have been to blame, in my opinion.

          ALSO, to resurrect one of my favorite cartoons, “Bloom County”:

          In one strip, Senator Bedfellow, the fundamentalist politician, is sitting on a park bench next to an attractive woman, lamenting his own lust while at the same time blaming the woman in his mind for being the object of said lust. Immediately upon Senator Bedfellow feeling her leg, the woman slams him with her purse and shouts, Pervert! and stalks off, leaving him to holler after her, “You should all be banned! Like asbestos!”

          • Sounds like the wiener may have the blame in both cases. Sorry, had to.

          • Joel, we’re trying to keep our PG rating.

          • Yes I think I have caused enough trouble in the iMonastary today. Seriously though, you have given me another reason to read “Ragamuffin Gospel”. Looking forward to it.

        • This is just so male centered! The issue should not be “women, watch how you affect men” but, rather, “Women, are you portraying the best image to the world that you have?” It is NOT about MEN! It is about female self respect!

      • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

        Believe it or not, most guys struggle with lust of the eyes. Should us guys learn to deal and look away when tempted? Yes. But the ladies would be doing us a favor if they chose the one piece over the thong. Just sayin…

        Joel, that is similar to the rationale Extreme Islam uses to justify the chador and burqa.

        • This is true. Ouch.

        • petrushka1611 says:

          Similar to definitely does not mean the same as. Also, Joel is asking for a favor, not commanding police to go out and beat women for how they’re dressed.

          • Pattie says:

            Joel is speaking the truth, for him and for many, many men. It is disingenuous to fault him for being candid, and it is a FAR cry from asking for some modesty as to avoid an occasion of sin; and blaming women or suggesting they wear head to toe burlap sacks.

            It is my belief that many girls and women do not understand the visual nature of male sexuality. Certainly, it is each man’s call to chastity and his responsibility to control his thoughts, but men, especially young men, can go from zero to sixty, involuntarily, at exposed skin or provocative clothing….the latter being the ONLY style I see at the high school wear I work.

            I didn’t really grasp this very well as a girl and young woman, but was lucky enough to have a brave father who sat me down and explained WHY I was “…not going out of the house dressed like THAT!”.

            @Rick….your garlic fry analogy is priceless!

          • Thanks Pattie and petrushka1611. I think HUG is right here though. Though I can ask for a favor, its ultimately our responsibility as men to obey Christ regardless of the temptations we face. Although, like your father did with you, I can try to enforce some extreme Islam on my daughters in their choice of clothing or lack thereof. :)

      • I find myself confused about how to feel about the modesty issue. First of all, we shoudl recognize that modesty are often cultural. In Victorian England, massive cleavage was normal but showing an ankle was scandalous. Also, it’s often overlooked that attitude and behavior is important to modesty – I would say that Mark Driscoll’s frat-boy Christianity may be more immodest than a woman whose shirt is cut a little low. And it’s worth noting that when the Bible talks about modesty, sometimes it is actually in the context of flaunting your wealth!

        With all that said, some clothing is just designed to be sexually provocative and probably shouldn’t be worn in public. It’s hard to draw any strict line.

        • By the way, I am a different Joel than the above one! :)

          • Sorry about that Joel. You were commenting on here before me so I will change up my name a bit.

            Interesting points. “Modesty” seems to be a subjective term. I think its great that Kylie Bisutti quit her modelling gig. Like I said above, it’s our responsibility as men to not give into temptation, even in the mind. But a little help from our sisters in Christ shouldn’t be too much to ask for. (I realize asking non-believers for modesty will probably only make things worse)

    • I have often wondered why it was ok to where something at the peach (or pool, lake, etc.) what would never be socially acceptable to wear anywhere else.

    • Does it have to be an either/or? Could both men and women work together to help each other in this area (especially Christ-followers…not expecting broader culture to take this up at all – but surely the Church could or should?)

      I understand that women may feel that the men blame them for the problems. But as a male in this culture (who especially struggles with lust of the eye), it feels like men get most of the blame and therefore all the responsibility whilst the ladies flaunt along in ignorant bliss… I certainly don’t want to address it the way islamic culture does – that’s the pendulum swing the other way – but IMO the pendulum is too far in the opposite direction here.

      • Andrew I think Christ-followers would be the ONLY ones to appeal to for modesty, unfortunately.

  8. Headless Unicorn Guy says:

    Apparently this guy from Epsom, NH went to Manchester and thought his ship had come in when he spotted the “Tubs of Fun” ball toss game at the carnival he was attending. Zoop! Before he could say, “D’oh!” poor Henry had lost $300 trying to win an X-Box Connect for his kids ($199.99 at your local Best Buy).

    That’s when he made his big mistake.

    It seems Henry went home and emptied out his savings account of an additional $2300 and came back to play more “Tubs of Fun.” And he lost it all.

    This guy is obviously not the sharpest tool in the shed.

    Carny games are RIGGED. With the same “ALMOST won the Big Jackpot” tricks as Vegas slots, just cruder. You have to assume they are rigged until proven otherwise.

    Who was it who said “A fool and his money are soon parted”?

    • What no one seems to notice is that his entire life savings was only $2,300.

      That should have been a clue right there.

  9. Rick Ro. says:

    Just thinking outloud here…anyone, feel free to shoot me down…

    We have Saturday Ramblings, which satirically and sarcastically points out the ridiculousness of silly Christians and Christianity around the nation and world. Now we have Midweek Monkery, which satirically and sarcastically points out the ridiculousness of silly Christians and Christianity around the nation and world. Is this site in danger of becoming a place that only points out the splinters in other people’s eyes, failing to remove the plank in its own?

    I’m not saying I don’t enjoy Saturday Ramblings, because I do. I’m not saying I won’t enjoy Midweek Monkery, because I probably will. But are we in danger of becoming a site that too easily and readily laughs at other people’s shortcomings and (in our view) silly beliefs?

    Maybe we should begin an “iMonk Monkeys” thread, where the stupidest comments made during the week by our regular bloggers and commenters (me included) are posted. Or something like that, in which we can poke fun at ourselves, rather than scouring only the “outside world” to make fun of its bad theology.

    • Midweek Monkery won’t just be about the evangelical circus or religiously oriented topics. Just a few items that make me laugh each week. Not nearly as wide-ranging and complete as Sat. Ramblings. Think of Sat. Ramblings as Sunday services and dinner with the family and MM as stopping at the pub on the way home during the week for a quick pint.

    • I do agree that poking fun at ourselves would be a good idea too. I’ll work on that.

      • Rick Ro. says:

        One of my thoughts was maybe starting a thread topic “Stupidest Thing You’ve Done as a Christian and/or in the name of Christ.” A sharing of some of our own cringe-inducing moments of theological failure. I know Michael Spencer freely and openly shared some of worst moments. It might be healthy for those of us here to share our own, just so we don’t think everyone else has a monopoly on crappy theology and stupid religiosity.

        • Oh, you don’t want to go there. You really don’t want to go there. Oh, the stories we could tell. …and things I have tried to forget. I suppose it could be a form of penance.

    • We could become like the Lark News!! ;-)

  10. jjblackcat says:

    Can’t really see that underwear catalogs are any worse than swimsuit catalogs, but oh, well. And what exactly constitutes Christian clothing?? Whatever.

    • Headless Unicorn Guy says:

      And what exactly constitutes Christian clothing??

      From when I went into Christian Bookstores some 25-30 years ago, probably a Bible Verse (or zip code of same) embroidered somewhere on the clothing item. That seemed to be the universal way to “Christianize” something. Including breath mints and pencils.

      Perhaps the silliest example of this came from an Eighties radio interview of the then-editor of The Wittenberg Door, who collected the tackiest items from Christian Bookstores. Even sillier than Testamints: “Scripture Soap”, with Bible verses (or zip codes; can’t remember clearly) engraved. The ad blurb was “Scripture Soap: Faith is the substance of things SOAPED for.”

    • Damaris says:

      “And what exactly constitutes Christian clothing??” I can’t believe you have to ask, jjblackcat: a waistless blue denim jumper with a tee-shirt (summer) or turtleneck (winter), socks, often ankle length, and any shoes so long as they are flat heeled and sensible; sneakers will do. If you need a picture, Bill Gothard or many Christian homeschooling sites will be able to provide one. Of course, the real question — on the level of the one concerning Scotsmen and their kilts — is whether the Christian woman has patronized Victoria’s Secret for her underlayer. Feel free to speculate, but I don’t think I want to know.

    • dumb ox says:

      “And what exactly constitutes Christian clothing??”

      Burkas…but only Christian(TM).

      I actually think “Christian(TM)” is a legal trademark of HUG Inc.

  11. Steve D says:

    And what exactly constitutes Christian clothing??

    Check with Michelle Duggard…

  12. Randy Thompson says:

    Thanks for Midweek Monkery and keep it up.

    I need all the yucks I can get midweek.

  13. Midweek Monkery 5/1/13 | internetmonk.com