Archive for the ‘What the Fuck?’ Category

Too sexy to fly

I was going to post about this the first time it happened but then figured, eh, it was probably an isolated incident.  But then it happened again

Apparently, in addition to checking your bags, making sure you don’t have dangerous items such as bombs, big bottles of liquid, knives and guns, Southwest Airlines wants to make sure you’re not dressed too sexy.  Click on the links above to see for yourself if the women harassed were dressed inappropriately. 

I think it’s silly.  And to think that it wasn’t too long ago when flight attendants were hired primarily on their looks. 

Read Full Post »

Another installment of Put the Video Camera Down! 

I saw this and wanted to shoot myself.  Would any girl actually respond to this guy?  For the sake of women everywhere, I hope not. 

Maybe I’m wrong.  Is this the future of dating?  God help us. 

Read Full Post »

Remember that question (asked of Miss Teen USA South Carolina) about how American students were having trouble finding the United States on the map? 

(Via David Kurtz at TPM) Here’s President Bush talking about Southern Louisiana: 

“[T]he taxpayers and people from all around the country have got to understand the people of this part of the world really do appreciate the fact that the American citizens are supportive of the recovery effort.”

“I come telling the folks in this part of the world that we still understand there’s problems and we’re still engaged.”

“We care deeply about the folks in this part of the world.”

In other related news, Bush announces his plan to negotiate a free trade agreement with the state of Louisiana. 

Read Full Post »

The Ann Arbor News has an article out today about how the city of Ann Arbor is considering using “public nuisance” laws to close down bars in order to cut down on “after hours fighting.”   

At that meeting, Mayor John Hieftje said that it was believed some bars just throw out violent patrons into the street and don’t take any steps to ensure the fighting doesn’t continue.

[City Council Member Joan] Lowenstein said she has heard the same thing.

“What was happening, instead of calling the police, they would just boot these people out in the street,” Lowenstein said. “Police need to know when a problem is about to happen, not that something has already happened.”

This is beyond stupid.  Of the five bars mentioned, four of them are campus bars, frequented most often by University of Michigan students.  This actually represents a substantial chunk of bar life in Ann Arbor, to be honest.  Those four (Touchdown’s Cafe, Rick’s American Cafe, Scorekeepers, Necto Night club) are pretty much like what you would find near most college campuses. 

The fifth bar, Studio 4, is closer to the downtown area of Ann Arbor away from campus and attracts a much different crowd mostly.  I was there about a year ago and my experience was a little weird.  Me and a couple of buddies weren’t allowed to leave for about ten minutes (bouncers had blocked the exits) because they were afraid a fight was about to break out on the street outside.  When we finally got outside there was a huge crowd of people not being let in the club because they were getting unruly waiting in line. 

As far as I know nothing happened that night.  And I could have sworn I saw Charles Woodson there too, talking to a couple girls, totally oblivious to the tension in the air. 

But back to the article, I have no idea what the angle is here for the city council, the mayor, and the city attorney.  But I do know that their approach and attitude to this issue is idiotic and ignorant.  It sounds like they just targeted the most popular bars in Ann Arbor because somehow or other the most popular bars have the most drunk people who in turn get in the most fights. 

Read Full Post »

The State of New Mexico is investigating the CBS show “Kid Nation” to see if it broke any laws in respect to work permits, contracts, and refusing to allow inspectors onto the property while filming. 

What caught my eye was the description of the premise of the show. 

Sisneros said officials became aware of the show — which places 40 kids, ages 8 to 15, in the New Mexico desert to build a society without any contact with their parents — when an inspector from the Department of Workforce Solutions notified the attorney general that he was not allowed on the property to inspect work permits.

I really have nothing to say about the particular legal issue. 

But if this were a sociological experiment, it would probably be considered unethical.  But since it’s television, I guess it’s perfectly fine to let kids fend for themselves in the desert.  And yeah, I get that the kids were probably not left completely unsupervised.  But 40 of them from the ages of 8 to 15? 

I saw that television show when it was actually a book called Lord of the Flies.  If it were real, it wouldn’t be appropriate to watch.  And if it’s appropriate to watch, it isn’t real.  So what’s the point? 

Read Full Post »

Attacking Iran

A growing buzz.  It’s been bandied about for awhile now.  Remember “the list?”  And more recently the Seymour Hersh articles in the New Yorker

Now former CIA agent Bob Baer says that the Bush Administration will order attacks on Iran within the next 6 months.  And John Bolton, the former U.N. Ambassador and all-around asshole (my opinion), says he sure hopes so

We’ve been saber-rattling Iran for so long it’s hard to believe they would not have prepared some sort of coordinated response.  The feeling seems to be that we can just order a few airstrikes to make a point and then force them to “cooperate.” 

This is the sort of colossally stupid approach to foreign policy, warfare, and negotiation that leads to humiliating losses. 

Read Full Post »

We all know there are men out there who don’t think women are much good for anything other than being available for sex whenever and however they want it. Roissy in DC takes this one step further and says women aren’t even good for that — at least, not as good as inanimate objects.

It makes you wonder about some people’s sex lives.

The basis of Roissy’s New Theory of Life, Dating and the Future of Male/Female Interactions as We Know It is that, with the increasing technological advances in sex robots (“she’ll move her limbs and gyrate during sex as well as talk dirty and respond to commands,” Roissy explains), men will actually no longer have any need for real live women. Given the choice between a sexbot designed to look like a supermodel or a real live “average-looking” woman, men will, in aggregate, choose the former, Roissy predicts.

His predictions are surprisingly (embarrassingly?) detailed, with sub-predictions for different castes of human beings, as he sees it. The basic premise is that unattractive women will be forced out of the dating/mating pool as unattractive and less-than-perfect men have sex exclusively with their sexbots; averagely attractive women will have to become more subservient to men in and out of bed just to be able to snag one away from his sexbot; and beautiful women will harem-style date the “alpha” males, who are the only ones who won’t rely on sexbots. All in all, this will lead to more polygamy, adultery, and male power.

Sexbots are a very real threat to the established order because men’s sexuality is so visually driven. The entire market structure of dating will shift seismically in the direction of men becoming choosier and less willing to please and women becoming looser and more willing to please.

It’s beautiful, isn’t it? It’s the perfect Nice Guy® fantasy, priceless in its equal mix of misogyny, insecurity, and entitlement (for a definitive rundown of the Nice Guy® phenomenon, see here). Yeah, yeah, well who needs all you real women when I can have sex with my Jessica Alba robot? Guess you’re all gonna hafta start putting out more and stop demanding treatment as an actual human being, aren’t ya now?

So let’s even just put aside for a moment here the fact that Roissy and his commenters seem to think that real live women are pretty much obsolete (except for making babies, as a few insightful commenters point out). Moving on to the “And People Say Feminists Hate Men” category … dear god, what kind of low expectations of the male species does it take to posit that a good portion of men, given the choice between sex/love/companionship with a fellow human and an inanimate object, would choose the inanimate object? Roissy Inc. seem to feel that no men actually have the capacity to feel emotions, care about people, desire love, etc. Real men are, in fact, only concerned with finding the prettiest possible thing, living or not, to stick their penises in. I mean, non-batshit-crazy guys, don’t you take offense to that? I’m offended, just on behalf of all the guys I know.

Of course, I take more offense to on behalf of women, who I’m pretty sure would be okay even if the whole futuristic sexbot scenario did play out. I mean, Roissy seems to believe that in a world where men showed no interest in sleeping with them, women would continue to be so desperate to snag a man that they’d either convert to polygamy en masse or revert back to an idealized 1950s style of submission. Sheesh. It’s as if Roissy’s never heard of lesbians.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »