I could provide a really long list of things that annoy me - they're not hard to come by - but rarely do I find them all sandwiched so snugly (and smugly!) together....and in an easily-disseminated format, no less!! The gods smile on me this fine sunny Friday. To wit: I abhor sanctimony, pretense, political correctness, and people who just need to clue you in on how intellectual they really are. (See also: Stuff White People Like for a full description of these sorts of folks.)
Yeah, I'm a bad liberal.
Anyway, the very order of the universe trembles at the existence of this blog. It boggles the mind. It makes me want to post immature things in the comments sections just because these morons are so......pedantic! (I couldn't help myself from posting in the comments section here. Guess which one I am?) The coup de grace? It's totally hosted by U-Penn. Ah, my wonderful alma mater (part one, anyway). Language Log, I salute you. You manage to make me feel dirty about being smart and good with words. Hats off, doucheballs!
5.20.2008
A bird? A plane? No....a UFP!!!
This hilarious little episode incorporates pretty much everything I adore....Garry Kasparov, Russian politics, daring acrobatics, public embarrassment, chaos, and an unidentified flying phallus.
OK, not so sure if the last item makes the "Zhenya loves" list .... but it's damn good for a laugh! Such a thing would only happen at a political conference in Russia. Trust me on this one. Tol'ko v Rossie...
OK, not so sure if the last item makes the "Zhenya loves" list .... but it's damn good for a laugh! Such a thing would only happen at a political conference in Russia. Trust me on this one. Tol'ko v Rossie...
5.19.2008
Taking Cupid's task to a whole new extreme
Taking kinkiness (or poor decision making) to a new level, a very trashed and frisky Canadian couple almost experienced true heartbreak last week after a sex game gone terribly wrong. The intoxicated duo, reports say, decided it would be a good idea for the lady in question to carve a heart into the gentleman's skin above - you guessed it - his heart.
The game took a turn for the worse when the lady, a bit too enthusiastic for her own good, pressed a bit too hard with the knife - and pierced her lover's heart. Literally. Kind of makes the whole Cupid myth seem superfluous, no?
The fellow is expected to make a full recovery and the couple is sticking by each other.....giving a new meaning to the phrase, "those who play together, stay together." All the same, wouldn't a tattoo have been less difficult?
The game took a turn for the worse when the lady, a bit too enthusiastic for her own good, pressed a bit too hard with the knife - and pierced her lover's heart. Literally. Kind of makes the whole Cupid myth seem superfluous, no?
The fellow is expected to make a full recovery and the couple is sticking by each other.....giving a new meaning to the phrase, "those who play together, stay together." All the same, wouldn't a tattoo have been less difficult?
5.14.2008
Pope Benedict, phone home!
Oh, Pope Benedict. You are a funny guy. Thanks for making my job here at WTH that much easier!! The things that come out of the Vatican...priceless!! In the past they've given us funnies like exorcism, witch hunts, the Spanish Inquisition, a handful of wars & Crusades, anti-scientific polemics, really messed up views about astronomy, handy torture devices, stigmata, and a long list of banned books. The latest?
The Vatican officially says it's okay to believe in aliens. As the Jesuit Director of the Vatican Observatory, Jose Gabriel Funes (as is fun - es?...because lo es muy divertido!), puts it oh-so-succinctly: "Just as we consider earthly creatures as 'a brother,' and 'sister,' why should we not talk about an extraterrestrial brother?" Just to clarify, in case you were confused, "aliens would still be God's creatures."
Ok. I'm not laughing about the notion of extraterrestrial life. The universe seems awful big to house only us... But crikey! Per the Vatican, we're not allowed to believe in.....evolution, abortion, Sinead O'Connor or Madonna, birth control, Martin Luther and his pesky Protestantism, animals having souls, Buddhism, homosexuality, and divorce....but ET and his amigos are entirely hunky dory with His Holiness?
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti...
The Vatican officially says it's okay to believe in aliens. As the Jesuit Director of the Vatican Observatory, Jose Gabriel Funes (as is fun - es?...because lo es muy divertido!), puts it oh-so-succinctly: "Just as we consider earthly creatures as 'a brother,' and 'sister,' why should we not talk about an extraterrestrial brother?" Just to clarify, in case you were confused, "aliens would still be God's creatures."
Ok. I'm not laughing about the notion of extraterrestrial life. The universe seems awful big to house only us... But crikey! Per the Vatican, we're not allowed to believe in.....evolution, abortion, Sinead O'Connor or Madonna, birth control, Martin Luther and his pesky Protestantism, animals having souls, Buddhism, homosexuality, and divorce....but ET and his amigos are entirely hunky dory with His Holiness?
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti...
5.13.2008
This never happeed in Mr. Popper's Penguins, damn it!
I'm sorry......this is the best article ever. No contest. The headline alone says it all:
"A seal has been caught on camera trying to have sex with a penguin. "
Smile, you're on candid camera! Titillating, huh? It gets, er, more disturbing... "'At first we thought it was hunting the penguin, but then it became clear that his intentions were rather more amorous,' de Bruyn recalled today via email"
You know...the entire article merits quoting as WTH fodder. Go read it yourself. And laugh.
"Seal caught on tape molesting a penguin. Scientists study rare example of interspecies sexual harassment."
The lead sentence:"A seal has been caught on camera trying to have sex with a penguin. "
Smile, you're on candid camera! Titillating, huh? It gets, er, more disturbing... "'At first we thought it was hunting the penguin, but then it became clear that his intentions were rather more amorous,' de Bruyn recalled today via email"
You know...the entire article merits quoting as WTH fodder. Go read it yourself. And laugh.
The overpopulated shall inherit the earth (or what's left of it)
I'm probably going to get flak for this one (folks...hate mail doesn't bug me. It's really doesn't. But it does make me laugh!) Anyway, I don't care. I find this disgusting, reprehensible, and irresponsible.
I am all for respecting cultural practices....up to a point. Cultural practices that include eating dogs (check out Eight Dainty Dog Meat if you don't remember!), cats, or horses may gross me out, but I don't think it's morally wrong - provided the animals are killed humanely. I personally think that arranged marriage kind of defeats the point of marriage - but others don't, and that's okay too - as long as you're not marrying off 13 year olds to creepy old men, a la Warren Jeffs. (Douchebag.) Strange piercings, tattoos, and so forth - not my cup o' tea, but acceptable - although I think things like genital mutilation are wrong, period.
So, you get it. I'm pretty laid-back when it comes to cultural traditions and whatnot....but this, this I find inexcusable. I've wanted to do a post on the Duggar family for awhile now, and given their recent announcement that Michelle Duggar is pregnant - again - I thought this was an appropriate time.
Pregnant again.....with her eighteenth child. Folks, I'm sorry, no one needs 18 kids. It's fucked up from every perspective I can possibly imagine. From a good parenting perspective - how can you ever develop a strong personal bond with each of your children when you pop out a new one every 9 months? From a financial perspective - if something happens to one of the parents (or even if it doesn't), how are you going to afford to send them all to college? (Then again, Dad's name is Jim Bob, so maybe college isn't such a concern.) From a health perspective, I don't think it can be good for a woman's organism to pop out baby after baby after baby with no time for the body to recover. From a feminist perspective (and I am far from being a feminist, believe me), it seems a bit sick that, in this day and age, this woman's sole role in life is to be barefoot and pregnant 24/7/365. From a fairness perspective, it seems really ass to make the eldest children act as surrogate parents for their myriad smaller siblings when they're only kids themselves.
But the thing that irks me the most is that this is so fucking irresponsible. How many orphaned kids are there in this world - and just in America? - who need loving homes already? Have these people looked at a population growth graph anytime recently? (That would require being able to read & comprehend, so perhaps not....) I don't think I can make this any simpler. Finite resources. Population growth (particularly among subsets that can't afford it). Increased drain on financial pools. Increased burden on the health care system. Increased impact on the environment. People.....get a clue. You do NOT NEED 18 kids. I don't care if you think God is telling you to be fruitful & multiply...enough is enough. Quality, not quantity.
I have heard from actual acquaintences of these people that they're "nice." Fine, maybe they are...but that really isn't the point. They are irresponsible and prime examples if the government wanted to make a case for intervening in family planning matters more than they already do. Ugh!!!
I am all for respecting cultural practices....up to a point. Cultural practices that include eating dogs (check out Eight Dainty Dog Meat if you don't remember!), cats, or horses may gross me out, but I don't think it's morally wrong - provided the animals are killed humanely. I personally think that arranged marriage kind of defeats the point of marriage - but others don't, and that's okay too - as long as you're not marrying off 13 year olds to creepy old men, a la Warren Jeffs. (Douchebag.) Strange piercings, tattoos, and so forth - not my cup o' tea, but acceptable - although I think things like genital mutilation are wrong, period.
So, you get it. I'm pretty laid-back when it comes to cultural traditions and whatnot....but this, this I find inexcusable. I've wanted to do a post on the Duggar family for awhile now, and given their recent announcement that Michelle Duggar is pregnant - again - I thought this was an appropriate time.
Pregnant again.....with her eighteenth child. Folks, I'm sorry, no one needs 18 kids. It's fucked up from every perspective I can possibly imagine. From a good parenting perspective - how can you ever develop a strong personal bond with each of your children when you pop out a new one every 9 months? From a financial perspective - if something happens to one of the parents (or even if it doesn't), how are you going to afford to send them all to college? (Then again, Dad's name is Jim Bob, so maybe college isn't such a concern.) From a health perspective, I don't think it can be good for a woman's organism to pop out baby after baby after baby with no time for the body to recover. From a feminist perspective (and I am far from being a feminist, believe me), it seems a bit sick that, in this day and age, this woman's sole role in life is to be barefoot and pregnant 24/7/365. From a fairness perspective, it seems really ass to make the eldest children act as surrogate parents for their myriad smaller siblings when they're only kids themselves.
But the thing that irks me the most is that this is so fucking irresponsible. How many orphaned kids are there in this world - and just in America? - who need loving homes already? Have these people looked at a population growth graph anytime recently? (That would require being able to read & comprehend, so perhaps not....) I don't think I can make this any simpler. Finite resources. Population growth (particularly among subsets that can't afford it). Increased drain on financial pools. Increased burden on the health care system. Increased impact on the environment. People.....get a clue. You do NOT NEED 18 kids. I don't care if you think God is telling you to be fruitful & multiply...enough is enough. Quality, not quantity.
I have heard from actual acquaintences of these people that they're "nice." Fine, maybe they are...but that really isn't the point. They are irresponsible and prime examples if the government wanted to make a case for intervening in family planning matters more than they already do. Ugh!!!
5.12.2008
Journalistic veracity hits new lows
Now, I am going to eschew making personal comments on the matter (you can probably guess what they are, anyway....) and instead focus on this "journalist's" logic - or, in this case, conspicuous lack thereof.
You want to make political arguments for why Hillary should stay in the race? Fine. I don't envy you that position! But for Chrissakes, try to use logic that, you know, makes sense. When the esteemed Ms. Churchwell attempts to justify the continued presence of Madame Clinton in the Democratic nomination race....here is the brilliant logic she uses (bold emphasis my own):
"Yes, the general election is different from the primaries. But far from being an especially protracted Democratic primary, this one is right on historical track. June is actually the magic month, in which the Democratic nomination was clinched in 1992 by Bill Clinton; in 1988 by Dukakis (Jesse Jackson didn't withdraw until June); in 1984 by Mondale (who didn't officially gain the nomination until the convention in July); in 1976 by Carter; and in 1972, the first year in which the present primary system operated, by McGovern."
Whoa. Deep breath. Let's look at the "facts" this brilliant woman calls upon to justify Hillary's ongoing existence...er, I mean, presence in the race. Historical precedent - fine. But consider the outcomes. Of the 5 candidates she mentioned, who received their nominations in June...
Dukakis got his ass handed to him in the general election.
Mondale could barely win a single state.
McGovern didn't win either.
Carter won for one term and was so ineffectual that he was a lame duck before his second year in office.
And Mr. Clinton almost got impeached, and brought the nation to its knees with his questionable conduct in the Oval Office, and subsequent (let's face it) perjury about said conduct.
So basically.....Sarah, your logic sucks. If you want a candidate that will do shittily in the general election, and if they do get elected, manage to fuck it up royally - yeah stay in the race, Hillary! (This is per her logic, mind you. I have my own logic on the topic...but that is neither here nor there!!!)
I hate poorly argued, poorly researched polemics - especially ones that appear in so-called reputable newsmagazines. What the hella?
You want to make political arguments for why Hillary should stay in the race? Fine. I don't envy you that position! But for Chrissakes, try to use logic that, you know, makes sense. When the esteemed Ms. Churchwell attempts to justify the continued presence of Madame Clinton in the Democratic nomination race....here is the brilliant logic she uses (bold emphasis my own):
"Yes, the general election is different from the primaries. But far from being an especially protracted Democratic primary, this one is right on historical track. June is actually the magic month, in which the Democratic nomination was clinched in 1992 by Bill Clinton; in 1988 by Dukakis (Jesse Jackson didn't withdraw until June); in 1984 by Mondale (who didn't officially gain the nomination until the convention in July); in 1976 by Carter; and in 1972, the first year in which the present primary system operated, by McGovern."
Whoa. Deep breath. Let's look at the "facts" this brilliant woman calls upon to justify Hillary's ongoing existence...er, I mean, presence in the race. Historical precedent - fine. But consider the outcomes. Of the 5 candidates she mentioned, who received their nominations in June...
Dukakis got his ass handed to him in the general election.
Mondale could barely win a single state.
McGovern didn't win either.
Carter won for one term and was so ineffectual that he was a lame duck before his second year in office.
And Mr. Clinton almost got impeached, and brought the nation to its knees with his questionable conduct in the Oval Office, and subsequent (let's face it) perjury about said conduct.
So basically.....Sarah, your logic sucks. If you want a candidate that will do shittily in the general election, and if they do get elected, manage to fuck it up royally - yeah stay in the race, Hillary! (This is per her logic, mind you. I have my own logic on the topic...but that is neither here nor there!!!)
I hate poorly argued, poorly researched polemics - especially ones that appear in so-called reputable newsmagazines. What the hella?
5.09.2008
When idols topple
This is a sad day for me, but I can't resist calling this out as consummate WTH fodder. Apparently even fashion icons (whose jobs I covet....) make really...bad....decisions.
Like, when going to a gala at the Met.
Anna Wintour - shame, shame, shame! You know better! As editor-in-chief of Vogue, you have your finger on the pulse of the fashion world. Unfortunately, the pulse of this ensemble is very much DOA. You can get any frock from any designer anywhere....and you wear this? This???
Anna. Go to bad fashion rehab. I will be happy to step in and fill your Louboutins until your fashion sense returns. Because this? Quelle dommage...
Like, when going to a gala at the Met.
Anna Wintour - shame, shame, shame! You know better! As editor-in-chief of Vogue, you have your finger on the pulse of the fashion world. Unfortunately, the pulse of this ensemble is very much DOA. You can get any frock from any designer anywhere....and you wear this? This???
Anna. Go to bad fashion rehab. I will be happy to step in and fill your Louboutins until your fashion sense returns. Because this? Quelle dommage...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
