When Will My Pornographic Shrek Christmas Ornament Arrive?
I am starting to think I will never receive my personalized, likely AI-generated horny Shrek Christmas ornaments I purchased from Wear and Decor. I had hoped the indecent and probably unauthorized Shrek ornament depicting the green ogre getting a blowjob would arrive before Christmas and, ideally, before I traveled home for the holidays. I doubt that’s going to happen. I think I’ve been rooked.
The ornament depicts Shrek, his eyes wide and a smile on his ogre lips, as a long haired Fiona descends upon his crotch. “Let’s get Shrekxy and save Santa the trip,” reads a caption above the scene on the online retailer Wear and Decor read. There was space at the bottom where I could personalize the ornament with the name of myself and a loved one, as if to indicate that I was Shrek and that Fiona was my wife.
playlist.megaphone.fm?p=TBIEA2…
When I showed it to my wife weeks ago, after we first put up our Christmas tree, she simply said “No.” “Don’t you think it’s funny?” I said.“You’re supposed to be shopping for a tree topper,” she said.
“It’s only $43.99 for two,” I said. “That’s a bargain.”She stared.
I had been shopping for a tree topper online when I stumbled into the strange world of AI generated pornographic custom ornaments starring popular cartoon characters listed on sites of dubious repute. I do not know what it says about my algorithms that attempting to find a nice, normal, and classy tree topper for Christmas led me to a horrifying world of horny—and seemingly AI generated— knock off novelty Christmas ornaments. I don’t want to reflect on that. I just want to show you what I’ve stumbled upon.
There is a whole underground world of erotic Christmas ornaments starring famous cartoon characters. Some of them are on Etsy, but most are dubious looking sites with names like Homacus and Pop Art. There are themes that repeat. Spanking. Butts. In flagrante delicto bedroom scenes. The promise that the purchaser can personalize these gifts with the name of their loved one and the logo of their favorite football team. I am sure the Baltimore Ravens love that you can buy an ornament depicting a nude Grinch gripping the ass of a female Grinch (notably not that of his canonical wife Martha May Whovier) emblazoned with their logo.
“My butt would be so lonely without you touching it all the time,” reads the inscription above Zootopia’s Nick Wilde with Judy Hopps bent over his knee. You can purchase this same scene with Belle and Beast, Rey and Ben from Star Wars, a pair of Grinches, or Jack Skellington and Sally from Nightmare Before Christmas. In another variant, a male cartoon character is bent over the ass of a presenting female. Shrek is nose deep in Fiona’s ass. “I adore and love every part of you—Especially your butt. Merry Grinchmas,” the caption reads.
The ornaments rarely carry the name of the actual characters they’re depicting. They are “Funny Fairytale Ornament” and “Funny Green Monsters” and “Personalized Funny Lion Couple Christmas Ornament, Custom Name Animal Lovers Decoration, Cute Romantic Holiday Gift.” These titles feel like hold overs from the prompt that was, I assumed, used in an AI image generator to create the ornaments. There are other signs.
Some of the Shrek ornaments refer to the green ogre as Grinches. Shrek often looks correct but Fiona is sometimes Yassified, her ogre features smoothed and made more feminine. In an ornament with Belle draped over Beast’s leg, the smiling prince has seven fingers on his left hand. The lighting in the “photos” of the objects is never quite right.
Time Magazine declared the “Architects of AI” as its Person of the Year in 2025 and there is something about flipping through these listings for cheap and horny ornaments that feels like living in the future. This is the world the architects have built, one where some anonymous person out there in the online ether can quickly generate a lewd cartoon drawing of something from your childhood in an attempt to swindle you for a few bucks while you’re shopping for a Christmas tree topper.
I clicked “purchase” on the $40 Shrek blowjob ornament on November 28. The money was deducted from my account but I have not received confirmation of shipping.
‘Architects of AI’ Wins Time Person of the Year, Sends Gambling Markets Into a Meltdown
The degenerate gamblers of Polymarket and Kalshi who bet that “AI” would win the Time Person of the Year are upset because the magazine has named the “Architects of AI” the person of the year. The people who make AI tools and AI infrastructure are, notably, not “AI” themselves, and thus both Kalshi and Polymarket have decided that people who bet “AI” do not win the bet. On Polymarket alone, people spent more than $6 million betting on AI gracing the cover of Time.As writer Parker Molloy pointed out, people who bet on AI are pissed. “ITS THE ARCHITECTS OF AI THISNIS [sic] LITERALLY THE BET FUCK KALSHI,” one Kalshi better said.
“This pretty clearly should’ve resolved to yes. If you bought AI, reach out to Kalshi support because ‘AI’ is literally on the cover and in the title ‘Architects of AI.’ They’re not going to change anything unless they hear from people,” said another.
“ThE aRcHiTeCtS oF AI fuck you pay me,” said a third.
“Another misleading bet by Kalshi,” said another gambler. “Polymarket had fair rules and Kalshi did not. They need to fix this.”
But bag holders on Polymarket are also pissed. “This is a scam. It should be resolved to a cancellation and a full refund to everyone,” said a gambler who’d put money down on Jensen Huang and lost. Notably, on Kalshi, anyone who bet on any of the “Architects of AI,” won the bet (meaning Sam Altman, Elon Musk, Jensen Huang, Dario Amodei, Mark Zuckerberg, Lisa Su, and Demis Hassabis), while anyone who bet their products—“ChatGPT” and “OpenAI” did not win. On Polymarket, the rules were even more strict, i.e. people who bet “Jensen Huang” lost but people who bet “Other” won.
“FUCK YOU FUCKING FUCK Shayne Coplan [CEO of Polymarket],” said someone who lost about $50 betting on AI to make the cover.
Polymarket made its reasoning clear in a note of “additional context” on the market.
“This market is about the person/thing named as TIME's Person of the Year for 2025, not what is depicted on the cover. Per the rules, “If the Person of the Year is ‘Donald Trump and the MAGA movement,’ this would qualify to resolve this market to ‘Trump.’ However if the Person of the Year is ‘The MAGA movement,’ this would not qualify to resolve this market to ‘Trump’ regardless of whether Trump is depicted on the cover,” it said.
“Accordingly, a Time cover which lists ‘Architects of AI’ as the person of the year will not qualify for ‘AI’ even if the letters ‘AI’ are depicted on the cover, as AI itself is not specifically named.”
It should be noted how incredibly stupid all of this is, which is perhaps appropriate for the year 2025, in which most of the economy consists of reckless gambling on AI. People spent more than $55 million betting on the Time Person of the Year on Polymarket, and more than $19 million betting on the Time Person of the Year on Kalshi. It also presents one of the many downsides of spending money to bet on random things that happen in the world. One of the most common and dumbest things that people continue to do to this day despite much urging otherwise is anthropomorphize AI, which is distinctly not a person and is not sentient.
Time almost always actually picks a “person” for its Person of the Year cover, but it does sometimes get conceptual with it, at times selecting groups of people (“The Silence Breakers” of the #MeToo movement, the “Whistleblowers,” the “Good Samaritans,” “You,” and the “Ebola Fighters,” for example). In 1982 it selected “The Computer” as its “Machine of the Year,” and in 1988 it selected “The Endangered Earth” as “Planet of the Year.”
Polymarket’s users have been upset several times over the resolution of bets in the past few weeks and their concerns highlight how easy it is to manipulate the system. In November, an unauthorized edit of a live map of the Ukraine War allowed gamblers to cash in on a battle that hadn’t happened. Earlier this month, a trader made $1 million in 24 hours betting on the results of Google’s 2025 Year In Search Rankings and other users accused him of having inside knowledge of the process. Over the summer, Polymarket fought a war over whether or not President Zelenskyy had worn a suit. Surely all of this will continue to go well and be totally normal moving forward, especially as these prediction markets begin to integrate themselves with places such as CNN.
Kalshi to become CNN’s official prediction market partner
Kalshi’s data will serve as a powerful complement to CNN’s reporting.Kalshi
