I got nothin'. Well, I've got giggling. And an excuse for a sodomy tag.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
daily haiku on love = daily dose of delightful
I think I stumbled across this blog when a friend re-posted one of his haikus from it. While I'm sure that just as we all do, the owner of the blog has some less than beautiful qualities, I sure as hell can't find them anywhere when I'm reading.
It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy everyday. Who couldn't use more of that?
Go ahead. Add me to your daily reading.
It makes me feel all warm and fuzzy everyday. Who couldn't use more of that?
Go ahead. Add me to your daily reading.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
oh sweet god, cover your eyes!
Fuckin' serious, folks?
I have nothing at all against Victoria's Secret models flaunting their tits all over television in more of an attempt to get men to stroke one off than to actually sell bras and panties. They're friggin' gorgeous, even if I do wonder how some of them don't fall over when the wind blows. But you know what? Chicks with tits bigger than theirs and added hips and ass to go along with them? They wear bras. And they're sexy. And they don't spend their time sitting at home watching television, eating ice cream out of a carton and getting "fatter." They wear pretty underthings. And they meet men for lunch in their skivvies (possibly only in commercials and fantasies but ya never know). And they fuck. And they do the very same things other women do.
That is all.
I have nothing at all against Victoria's Secret models flaunting their tits all over television in more of an attempt to get men to stroke one off than to actually sell bras and panties. They're friggin' gorgeous, even if I do wonder how some of them don't fall over when the wind blows. But you know what? Chicks with tits bigger than theirs and added hips and ass to go along with them? They wear bras. And they're sexy. And they don't spend their time sitting at home watching television, eating ice cream out of a carton and getting "fatter." They wear pretty underthings. And they meet men for lunch in their skivvies (possibly only in commercials and fantasies but ya never know). And they fuck. And they do the very same things other women do.
That is all.
I'm just *not* going to do it, thanks
I need new sneakers.
Fear not, this post isn't going to revolve solely (ha!) around my need for new athletic footwear but the fact I'm still wearing a pair of sneakers with a giant hole in the bottom of the left one *is* what inspired this post.
I don't generally care for sneakers. I only wear them to and from work and when I go to the gym. Truth be told, I hate footwear in general. Have you ever heard of bras being referred to as "boobie zoos"? That's much how I feel about shoes. Foot zoos. Hate 'em. But much like math, it's a necessary evil. So, I buy sneakers.
Over the years, I've mainly purchased Nike sneakers because when I spend the good hour or two it takes me to purchase one lousy pair of shoes, I simply wind up feeling the most comfortable in their shoes. But there has always been that nagging little voice in my head telling me to buy a different brand because of Nike's alleged repeated asshattery, such as their piss poor child labour laws and the likelihood that little Tommy and Tammy were paid $.05 for every eight pairs of shoes they produced while I'm forking over close to $100 a pair. But I have a really difficult time with boycotting.
Everyday, companies are in the news for one reason or another, often with bad press. Most recently, I gave up Starbucks for a bit because of their lousy-ass handling of a teenager's sexual assault claim. What did I get this morning on my way into work? A tasty little nonfat white mocha with raspberry. Back in 2006, the Marriott Hotel chain was in the news for claiming a woman who was raped at gunpoint in front of her children was to blame. Have I stayed in a Marriott since then? Indeed. Is it fairly likely I'll stay in a Marriott again? It is. Obviously, there are far more instances of companies using questionable practices and my continued patronization of those companies. But if I boycott every company whose practices I disagree with, I'm going to be left on the Wells St. bridge asking for change right alongside the guitar playing homeless guy. Although, I *will* take this opportunity to let you know, Mr. Polanski, that I very much would enjoy seeing The Ghost Writer. But I'm going to take that entertainment hit and let your film fall into the "ain't never gonna happen" category because I can't stomach even a penny of my money finding its way back to you.
But back to Nike. After everyone's favourite hoops-throwing rapist had his case dropped, Nike was the first company to 'take him back.' The only people who know what happened in that Denver hotel room are Kobe and his accuser but my default is to believe a victim. But no matter whether he raped that woman or not, his first post-rape case commercial for Nike was this:
In it, we see him shooting hoops and hear his voice telling us, Love me or hate me; it's one or the other. Always has been. Hate my game, my swagger. Hate my fade away, my hunger. Hate that I'm a veteran. A champion. Hate that. Hate it with all your heart. And hate that I'm loved for the exact same reasons.
Feel free to call me a humourless prude of a feminist but that shit just rubs me the wrong way. If you were, to say, Google some of his earlier commercials, you'll (hopefully) notice quite a difference between those and the latter ones after his case was dropped.
And there's Tiger's new craptastic commercial.
Cue Tiger looking all sad and lonely while looking at the camera and listening to his dead father say, "Tiger, I am more prone to be inquisitive. To promote discussion. I wanna find out what your thinking was. I wanna find out what your feelings are. And, did you learn anything?"
While I don't believe Kobe had consensual sex with the woman who accused him of rape, from what's been told to the public, Tiger *did* have consensual sex with his mistresses. Sure, he's a massive asshat with a serious Madonna / Whore complex (Tiger, if you're reading, here's a tip: the women dudes want to fuck? They can be the very same women dudes also want to marry. They need not be separate.) but I don't give a flying golf ball what or who Tiger sticks his dick in, provided it's a consensual act. Even so, I think Nike's ad is in piss poor taste and it gives me the creeps.
And now, we've got this Major Douchenozzle, Ben Roethlisberger. Yet again, he's been accused of sexual assault (that's three times, for those who are keeping track). Even if I allowed for the "bitches always put out, feel regret and then cry rape" argument (which I don't), exactly how many women is it going to take before it's acknowledged this guy has a serious entitlement complex? No criminal charges does not equal innocence and in the very least, Roethlisberger is a fratboy-esque jock who spends his free time drunkenly pawing at women. But it's no surprise that Nike continues to stand by him.
Once, twice, three times you've proved yourselves to be a company of jagoffs, Nike. Remember when you suspended Michael Vick because of his love of vicious dog fighting? Yeah, me too. I'm no marketing executive or genius business woman but wouldn't it just be cheaper to put out a press release stating "Nike believes 100% that dogs are man's best friend. Cruelty and abuse toward animals will be taken very serious and the abusers will be punished. Abuse and disrespecting women? Eh, we're gonna go ahead and let those slide."
I hope Adidas foot zoos are comfortable.
Fear not, this post isn't going to revolve solely (ha!) around my need for new athletic footwear but the fact I'm still wearing a pair of sneakers with a giant hole in the bottom of the left one *is* what inspired this post.
I don't generally care for sneakers. I only wear them to and from work and when I go to the gym. Truth be told, I hate footwear in general. Have you ever heard of bras being referred to as "boobie zoos"? That's much how I feel about shoes. Foot zoos. Hate 'em. But much like math, it's a necessary evil. So, I buy sneakers.
Over the years, I've mainly purchased Nike sneakers because when I spend the good hour or two it takes me to purchase one lousy pair of shoes, I simply wind up feeling the most comfortable in their shoes. But there has always been that nagging little voice in my head telling me to buy a different brand because of Nike's alleged repeated asshattery, such as their piss poor child labour laws and the likelihood that little Tommy and Tammy were paid $.05 for every eight pairs of shoes they produced while I'm forking over close to $100 a pair. But I have a really difficult time with boycotting.
Everyday, companies are in the news for one reason or another, often with bad press. Most recently, I gave up Starbucks for a bit because of their lousy-ass handling of a teenager's sexual assault claim. What did I get this morning on my way into work? A tasty little nonfat white mocha with raspberry. Back in 2006, the Marriott Hotel chain was in the news for claiming a woman who was raped at gunpoint in front of her children was to blame. Have I stayed in a Marriott since then? Indeed. Is it fairly likely I'll stay in a Marriott again? It is. Obviously, there are far more instances of companies using questionable practices and my continued patronization of those companies. But if I boycott every company whose practices I disagree with, I'm going to be left on the Wells St. bridge asking for change right alongside the guitar playing homeless guy. Although, I *will* take this opportunity to let you know, Mr. Polanski, that I very much would enjoy seeing The Ghost Writer. But I'm going to take that entertainment hit and let your film fall into the "ain't never gonna happen" category because I can't stomach even a penny of my money finding its way back to you.
But back to Nike. After everyone's favourite hoops-throwing rapist had his case dropped, Nike was the first company to 'take him back.' The only people who know what happened in that Denver hotel room are Kobe and his accuser but my default is to believe a victim. But no matter whether he raped that woman or not, his first post-rape case commercial for Nike was this:
In it, we see him shooting hoops and hear his voice telling us, Love me or hate me; it's one or the other. Always has been. Hate my game, my swagger. Hate my fade away, my hunger. Hate that I'm a veteran. A champion. Hate that. Hate it with all your heart. And hate that I'm loved for the exact same reasons.
Feel free to call me a humourless prude of a feminist but that shit just rubs me the wrong way. If you were, to say, Google some of his earlier commercials, you'll (hopefully) notice quite a difference between those and the latter ones after his case was dropped.
And there's Tiger's new craptastic commercial.
Cue Tiger looking all sad and lonely while looking at the camera and listening to his dead father say, "Tiger, I am more prone to be inquisitive. To promote discussion. I wanna find out what your thinking was. I wanna find out what your feelings are. And, did you learn anything?"
While I don't believe Kobe had consensual sex with the woman who accused him of rape, from what's been told to the public, Tiger *did* have consensual sex with his mistresses. Sure, he's a massive asshat with a serious Madonna / Whore complex (Tiger, if you're reading, here's a tip: the women dudes want to fuck? They can be the very same women dudes also want to marry. They need not be separate.) but I don't give a flying golf ball what or who Tiger sticks his dick in, provided it's a consensual act. Even so, I think Nike's ad is in piss poor taste and it gives me the creeps.
And now, we've got this Major Douchenozzle, Ben Roethlisberger. Yet again, he's been accused of sexual assault (that's three times, for those who are keeping track). Even if I allowed for the "bitches always put out, feel regret and then cry rape" argument (which I don't), exactly how many women is it going to take before it's acknowledged this guy has a serious entitlement complex? No criminal charges does not equal innocence and in the very least, Roethlisberger is a fratboy-esque jock who spends his free time drunkenly pawing at women. But it's no surprise that Nike continues to stand by him.
Once, twice, three times you've proved yourselves to be a company of jagoffs, Nike. Remember when you suspended Michael Vick because of his love of vicious dog fighting? Yeah, me too. I'm no marketing executive or genius business woman but wouldn't it just be cheaper to put out a press release stating "Nike believes 100% that dogs are man's best friend. Cruelty and abuse toward animals will be taken very serious and the abusers will be punished. Abuse and disrespecting women? Eh, we're gonna go ahead and let those slide."
I hope Adidas foot zoos are comfortable.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
thought processes are fascinating
So, I'm reading the article, Study: Spanking Kids Leads to More Aggressive Behavior.
The last sentence of the second paragraph states,
Nope. See pictures of the evolution of the college dorm.
What the? If there was anything about the article that specifically dealt with college life (other than the fact the study comes out of Tulane University), I could certainly see where one's mind may wander off in different directions when reading such an article. The effects of hazing on college students pledging fraternities / sororities? Sure. The *gasp* sexual experimentation in which some college students indulge? Sure. How to find and use common dorm room items as implements of consensual corporal punishment play in order to allow you to save all the extra bucks you can for Ramen Noodles and cases of beer? It's possible (okay, probably not in Time magazine). But the evolution of college living conditions? I just don't see where the frack that comes from.
The least they could have done was link to an online bookstore or two.
The last sentence of the second paragraph states,
Still, as many parents can attest, few responses bring about the immediate interruption of a full-blown tantrum like a swift whack to the bottom.What link immediately follows that paragraph, you ask? Might it be a lovely pie chart showing us in data form the percentage of angry, violent adults who were spanked when they were kids? Links to further studies on the topic?
Nope. See pictures of the evolution of the college dorm.
What the? If there was anything about the article that specifically dealt with college life (other than the fact the study comes out of Tulane University), I could certainly see where one's mind may wander off in different directions when reading such an article. The effects of hazing on college students pledging fraternities / sororities? Sure. The *gasp* sexual experimentation in which some college students indulge? Sure. How to find and use common dorm room items as implements of consensual corporal punishment play in order to allow you to save all the extra bucks you can for Ramen Noodles and cases of beer? It's possible (okay, probably not in Time magazine). But the evolution of college living conditions? I just don't see where the frack that comes from.
The least they could have done was link to an online bookstore or two.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
