Archive for July, 2010
Friday Open Thread: July 9th, 2010
What’s on your minds this Friday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
Thursday Open Thread: July 8th, 2010
What’s on your minds this Thursday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
Tipper Gore sure is spending a strange amount of time in California…wonder why
Anyone concerned about the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming, and interested in its takedown, needs to pay close attention to Tipper Gore and her movements.
Here’s another People magazine article on the Gores, which is 95% useless. Essentially, it’s just a blurb to keep the Gore sexual assault story in the headlines, without revealing anything new. This is a trick People magazine uses a lot — our guess is there’s a dry erase board in a boardroom somewhere, with the stories People’s editors want covered; every issue needs to have one piece on that story, even if it’s just a shallow recap, or an article quoting an unidentified “friend” weakly claiming this, that, or the other isn’t true. The principals involved in the story aren’t actually quoted, and no attempt even seems to be made to speak to them. The magazine knows it has months of stories ahead of it with the Gores…and People will string this out as long as it possibly can to sell more copies.
So, the only real interesting bit in this article is the mention of Tipper Gore “making a new life for herself” in California.
Why California?
In the article, it mentions Tipper being present for a big “family event’ at a lake somewhere in Tennessee, where presumably the Gores have many friends and family members. If someone wanted to “make a new life for herself” the natural place to do that would be somewhere like Tennessee, where Tipper would have a support system ready-made to springboard that new life.
Why choose California instead?
With all of California’s budget and other problems, not to mention the natural disasters and endemic woes, why resettle there? If Tipper wanted somewhere tropical and peaceful, there’s plenty of room in Florida and Hawaii. If she wanted someplace cosmopolitan and glamorous, there’s New York and Connecticut.
Why California?
It seems like this has 100% to do with California’s EXTREMELY generous 50/50 assets-splitting provisions in divorce.
And it feels like Tipper’s going to be filing for that divorce as a resident of the Golden State so she can take half of ManBearPig’s vast carbon-credit backed fortune.
We hope she gets as much as she can, then disappears into obscurity to enjoy her money any way she likes. We’ve never much liked Tipper Gore, and have thought she was something of a loon since her early 1990s crusade against rap music and its attempts to censor lyrics and destroy the careers of performers she did not approve of. No one appointed Mrs. Gore to be our watchdog or Culture Tsarina, and no one ever will. Take all of ManBearBig’s money, then take a flying leap, sister.
The Gores’ divorce will be very interesting for a great number of reasons, not least of all will be any insight we get into ManBearPig’s actual assets, and the full scope of how much the Cult of Anthropogenic Global Warming is actually worth.
It will also be interesting to see how effective a pope Gore will be to his cult after his fortune’s clipped in half by the California divorce, and all the exposure it will bring him.
Especially if Tipper intends to use People magazine and other tabloids, through unidentified “friends”, to further humiliate her soon to be ex husband by revealing everything about him. Maybe these little blurbs in the magazine that say nothing are something of a warning to Gore — letting him know that the magazine is committed to filling at least a page every issue on this story, so if Gore’s not generous with that divorce, Tipper could start getting chatty via intermediaries…with presumably an awful lot to tell that ManBearPig would want kept secret.
Ricky Hollywood apologizes to the Palin family in People Magazine
Normally, Ricky Hollywood (nee, Levi Johnston) isn’t worth mentioning, in anything other than discussions of biological males with a micropenis (one of the most common ways Ricky and the current president are linked in conversation, incidentally).
But, this People magazine article is interesting for the fact that Johnston takes the opportunity to apologize publicly to the Palin family in Alaska for most of the nasty things he has done to betray and backstab them. Essentially, it seems Johnston is blaming his ungrateful and reprehensible behavior on the likes of Kathy Griffin and others in Hollywood who “used (him)” to attack the Palins — and have now seemed to throw him away. So, Ricky Hollywood, with no more Hollywood to exploit him, seeks the role of prodigal son returning to the good graces of the next American First Family.
The Palins seem like decent, forgiving people, and we know it’s in their nature to show kindness and compassion to everyone. So, if they choose to forgive Ricky Hollywood, that’s their right and prerogative. They can do what they wanna do.
What’s really interesting to us in all of this is the fact that People’s even running the apology from Johnston. Why? It’s not like an apology story will drive magazine sales…unless People sees that Governor Palin’s popularity is high enough amongst People readers that an apology from Johnston is something they wanted to see, and would buy an issue of People at the checkout stand to read.
Whenever politics and entertainment collide in a magazine like People, it’s important to look beyond the particular article at hand and into the deeper meaning of that intersection. Politics is boring to most Americans. People magazine has a whole folder of photos of Jennifer Love Hewitt shopping for groceries, walking dogs, and getting foam on the tip of her nose while drinking frappuchino (while simultaneously trying to look adorable, but failing). If People can’t fill an issue with actual news, and has empty pages, rather than write about politics they’ll run more of those ubiquitous Jennifer Love Hewitt photos, as a full page, because either that’s JLH’s personal deal with the devil or she’s some sort of running joke in the entertainment trades (or a little of both).
It feels, to us, that People magazine, and its sister publications in the tabloid world, received blowback over the course of Ricky Hollywood’s shameful trajectory, and there must be stacks of letters in People’s offices from readers who didn’t like what Kathy Griffin and her ilk were pushing against the Palins. Maybe running this apology is paean to all those out there who’ve been telling People that Ricky Hollywood would never hurt the Governor in their minds, and that ultimately the Palin Derangement Brigades would run out of venom to spit at her.
Kathy Griffin is an unfunny gorgon whose mean-spiritedness and “hijinks” destine her for karmic comeuppance. It is very much apocryphal that “the gays” all love her. We think she’s a sad joke of a woman, who, like most in Hollywood, has no idea what she’s talking about when she enters political waters (in an ill-fitting one-piece that gives her diaper butt, no doubt). Recently, an episode of her train wreck reality show aired where Griffin went to Alaska with Johnston and embarrassed herself. We’d say Ricky Hollywood embarrassed himself, too, but really at this point that’s either redundant or impossible.
Griffin will continue to talk smack about the Palins, because Griffin doesn’t exist without some manufactured feud. She’s one-note, with very little creativity, and still relies heavily on stale ’90s jokes about her being mistaken for the woman on NewsRadio (a much funnier redhead who’s not so fueled by bitterness and spite). So, don’t expect Griffin to drop her Palin Derangement any time soon.
It will be interesting, though, to see what Ricky Hollywood does next. It looks like his micropenis prevented him from attaining that career in pornography he went to Hollywood seeking. That’s what a centerfold in Playgirl magazine is supposed to launch a man into, unless he’s not equipped for the task. We’d heard numerous stories of Ricky Hollywood going to various showbiz parties and receiving the same cold shoulder bottom feeders like Griffin are given. No one especially wanted him around, his fifteen minutes were up, so maybe he sees that his future lies in Alaska…so it’s best for him long-term to mend fences with the people he trashed for the better part of a year with Griffin at his side.
He seems to realize Governor Palin is not going anywhere, that his attacks on her have only made her stronger, and that he needs to get with the program and stop embarrassing himself if he wants to have a cordial relationship with the mother of his son…and the rest of her family. Maybe some Alaskans behind the scenes told Ricky Hollywood to knock it off and brought him to his senses themselves. Alaskans seem like they can be pretty plain-spoken and effective when they care to be.
Why do you think People magazine is running his apology…and why is this happening now?
Wednesday Open Thread: July 7th, 2010
What’s on your minds this Wednesday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
Monday Open Thread: July 5th, 2010
Fourth of July in Boystown, courtesy of Panda's cell phone.
What’s on your minds this Monday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
How did you and your family spend the Fourth of July?
Submit your questions, comments, and opinions on Pride Parades — we'll include answers and material in our 2010 Pride essay
We’re doing a write-up on Pride here in Chicago, and thought it would be interesting if you’d use this thread to chime in with any questions, comments, and opinions you have on Gay Pride Month and Pride Parades.
You can be as real as you want to be…and it will help us when we’re writing the essay, because the goal for us is to do something we’ve never seen the Gay community actually do, and it’s explain Pride and what goes on that month to a larger national audience who might not “get it”.
There’s a reason behind almost everything that you see, and since we know just about everyone who was up on those floats here in Chicago, we thought we’d invest the time in crafting something that could be very educational and interesting to a lot of people.
So, to make it as good as we can, we’d like you to help us understand what Americans out there don’t get, don’t like, don’t understand, or don’t realize about Pride.
Fill the thread up, and don’t spare our, or anyone’s feelings. Be real, so we can address all of this in the essay to come.
Soggy Sandwich Society Roundup, Week of June 28th-July 2nd 2010
Help fill this thread with the research we need for a larger project we want to accomplish — tracking the Media’s pushing of cucumber-and-mayonnaise Republicans (dubbed by us as “The Soggy Sandwich Society”) like Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, and others that the White House wants to run against in 2012.
The Media is trying to lay the groundwork for installation of one of these men as the losing 2012 candidate, so that Obama can win a second term in a cake walk. We do not want to see that happen.
In the interest of full-disclosure, we are 100% behind Governor Sarah Palin and want her to win the GOP nomination and the presidency, so 80% of this effort is in helping lay some groundwork of our own…namely, giving Palin supporters a jumpstart on taking down her competition for the nomination. BUT, should the Governor decide not to run (but, we totally think she’s running), our REAL GOAL, above all, is to prevent Obama from winning that second term. To do that, we need a Pioneer Feminist like Governor Palin running…or a tough as nails, take no prisoners Republican like Chris Christie. If not Palin, then Christie, if not Christie, then Governor Brewer, if not Brewer, then Senator DeMint, if not DeMint, then someone else in that pantheon of conservatives who don’t take and crap from the Left and who KNOW HOW TO FIGHT.
We want to start compiling a matrix showing the coordination of the national Media to push losing Republican candidates towards the 2012 nomination.
Andrew Breitbart’s excellent work exposing the Journolist scandal has proved, definitively, that Leftists coordinate behind the scenes to write complementary pieces in the same meme, across all Media platforms, with specific pre-determined goals in mind. The goal for 2012, duh, is for them to re-elect their Lightbringer.
To stop this, we need to show Americans how they are being manipulated…and give them definitive proof of why Romney, Pawlenty, Daniels, and the rest of the Soggy Sandwich Society should not be the nominee…because this is just what the Left wants.
We need your help to do this — so please look back on this week and post links to any articles you can find in the Media where the following Soggy Sandwiches received favorable, glowing, uncritical press:
(1) Mittens Romney
(2) Tim Pawlenty
(3) Mitch Daniels
(4) John Thune
(5) Jon Huntsman
(6) Newt Gingrich
(7) Bobby Jindal
(8) Anyone we are forgetting?
This is a resource that could prove invaluable in the months and years ahead leading to 2012. If we start it now, and keep compiling it, then it could be a major headache for the Romney campaign in particular — shutting him down before he can make any inroads into Iowa because Republican voters will see clearly that he’s the Democrats’ favorite candidate, as evidenced by his strong support in the Leftist Media.
Every Friday, we’ll ask your help in compiling that week’s Soggy Sandwich Society Roundup.
We hope you can help.
Reason.TV's Nanny State Award highlights anti-Ladies Night movement
We saw this over at Reason.TV and had to chime in with the Boystown take on the anti-Ladies Night movement, which we always believed was just a Boystown phenomenon, really.
About four years ago, bachelorette parties in Boystown triggered a MAJOR blowback against women coming into gay bars to, largely, point, stare, giggle, and pinch the butts of cute gay guys…which they treated like pieces of meat there to objectify and degrade in the spirit of their friend’s “last night out!”.
The reason this became such a problem was because most of these women carried with them “bachelorette party activity cards”, which included dares such as “Find the cutest guy in the room and pinch his bottom” or “Go up to the best looking man you can find and ask to see his underwear”. So, in Chicago, girls who were too scare to pull these stunts in straight bars started hitting Sidetracks, Roscoes, Cocktail, Charlies, Kit Kat, Lucky Horseshoe, and other gay bars…where there were hot guys aplenty, but these guys were all non-threatening and easy prey for these antics.
The usual reaction of the guys was typically shock and stunned silence that a woman just came up and pinched their butts. There’s typically a better chance of a Great White shark attack in the men’s room off Glass Bar than there is of being molested by a strange woman in a gay bar.
Gay guys don’t think this stuff is funny, but a good portion of us do follow the Gay Man’s Code of offering up a compliment to at least one woman out that night, telling her she looks great in whatever she’s wearing, to get that giant smile on her face and make her feel special. It’s something most of us do, particularly our friend Panda, who believes it’s a self-esteem boost the woman will most likely remember for the rest of her life. ”Remember that time we went to Roscoe’s, and that little Gaysian guy in the black-and-white hat told me he loved this dress? Well, I’m wearing it again because it’s my “Magic Dress” now and I always feel so good in it”.
So, it’s not that gay guys don’t like straight women coming into gay bars. Hell, half the gay guys there bring along a “Fairy’s Princess”, a sidekick straight women dragged along on many a Boystown adventure by men who think they’re Will and women too blind to realize they’re Grace (not a good thing for either of them, to be honest). Please never call these women “Fag Hags” or “Fruit Flies”. Though “fairy” is still in the range of pejorative, at least in this case the woman gets off being a “princess”, instead of a hag or a fly. At least that’s something. And all of us here have been called fag, fruit, fairy, you name it so many times those words mean almost as much to us as being called a RAAACIST! means to anyone who stands up to this current administration. If you hurl the worst curse you can imagine on someone enough, it loses all its power because it’s drowned in its own repetition.
Straight women are always welcome in gay bars. Bachelorette parties are welcome in most gay bars, too, though the women involved are expected to at least behave as well and with as much decorum as the men who are in the bar too. If guys aren’t screaming and yelling and pinching people, then women shouldn’t be doing that either. That kind of thing might get on at Hydrate late on a Saturday night at one of their Circuit parties, but it’s not the typical Boystown scene to be screaming and hollering and carrying on like idiots just because a friend of yours is getting married at some point in the future (and the idea that this is anyone’s “last night out” is ridiculous…people who drink that much, that fast, with that much gusto do this every Saturday and won’t be stopping because one of them is going to wear an expensive, poofy, white dress in a few weeks).
There was an article in one of the Chicago gay magazines a while ago talking about some gays resenting these bachelorette girls because they can get married but gay men cannot. We’ve actually never in our lives heard anyone make an issue of this. There’s no marriage-jealousy at play here, at least none that we’ve seen.
Frankly, if two guys want to get married, there’s nothing really stopping them in practical terms. We know plenty of guys who are “married” here in Boystown. They date. They live together for a while. They buy a condo together. Then, at some point, they go to someplace really, really gay like San Francisco or P-Town or even Gay Days at Disney and one of them makes a big production of giving the other a ring…usually something with rainbows worked in some way, instead of a big honking diamond. Then, they throw a big party for all of their friends on a roof deck somewhere, like the one at the Center on Halsted which we believe was designed specifically for these occasions. Everyone wears white, like Steven Spielberg’s personal vision of Heaven, Food for Thought or Hearty Boys caters it, and depending on how much the guys have to spend, low-level celebrities of the Kathy Griffin, Tiffany, Deborah Gibson, or Donna Summer variety are hired as “celebrity guests” or entertainment.
If you have seen Sex and the City: 2, then you have been to one of these gay “weddings”. They happen all the time, and are called “Commitment Ceremonies”, “Joinings”, “Mantrimonies”, or whatever the two guys (or gals) want to call them. Our friend Sebastian has party-planned tons of these, with the most memorable one of all being a lesbian ho-down at the Ritz-Carlton in Cleveland in the mid-90s (where one of the women dressed up like Reba McIntyre, and the other was Dale Evans, and Bast had to rent a special wooden floor to cover the Ritz’s carpet so hay could be strewn about, with one section of the room triple-Scotch-guarded so there could be live chickens, goats, pot belly pigs, and rabbits in a lesbian wedding petting zoo).
Just because the state won’t legally recognize that ceremony as binding in any way doesn’t stop gays from having their parties and standing up in front of a crowd of their friends and saying they’ll be together always, invoking every Boystown “marriage” cliche gays have borrowed from the straight world and given our own spin to (or, as our friend Althea puts it, “fabulized”).
Bast came THIS CLOSE to having one of these himself, when he and David (the Asperger’s/prescription drug addict/serial cheater/son of Louella) were together. He would have worn a black tux, and David would have probably wanted to wear a white one, but we bet any money the rest of us would have somehow tricked him into something really unflattering, like a carnation Western tux, because we all hated him (and still do, really). David would have also worn a hat, which was Panda’s promise should Bast have made “the biggest mistake of his life” by marrying David. ”If that train wreck is going to happen, David’s going to look as ridiculous as possible, and with all the Vicodin and Xanax in his system, he won’t even know it. I see feathers. Lots of ‘em”.
So, we know very few gay men who have any problem at all with straight people getting married — because, honestly, for all intents and purposes, the gay community has essentially created its own version of “marriage” that we believe needs no formal recognition from the state. The state of Illinois does not get to say whether two guys can have a big party, register for lavish gifts, hire washed up 80s singers to attend, or gather as many people onto a roof as possible. The state of Illinois also does not get to prevent two guys from owning property together in a legal contract, or from structuring their wills to make sure that they inherit all of the other’s estate when one of them dies. We’re sure there are tax matters that make things different for a same sex couple as opposed to a straight couple, but we know for a fact there are very good lawyers in big cities like Chicago that must make an awful lot of money being very, very good at granting same sex couples almost every single legal protection that straight couples receive.
There are those who’ll scream and shout that “almost” will never be good enough, to which we like to remind them that there’s no divorce involved with same-sex couples…so if these unions don’t last, that’s one thing straight people will have to endure that two guys or two women won’t ever have to deal with. No messy and expensive divorces. No alimony. No court-ordered this, that, or the other. Two guys get married. They split. Each takes his things, they sell that condo, maybe fight over the dog (and who really loves it more), and that’s it.
No one we know is kept awake at night pulling out his hair over the unfairness of the fact random straight girls on the loose in Boystown can get married but he can’t. Please. That Rogaine’s expensive. Why waste it over a bachelorette party?
BUT, for whatever reason, about four years or so ago a bar here called Charlie’s took a stand on all of this and started charging women $20 as cover to enter the bar, when men were only charged $5. This apparently came after a few very rowdy bachelorette parties made some guys feel uncomfortable, by making them the butts (literally) of those aforementioned party games. Charlie’s is a late-night dance bar that does not get jumping until 130am most nights. Before that, it’s a country-western bar where guys in plaid and cowboy hats whirl around the floor together, with one tough as nails lesbian bouncer serving as dance chaperone. If you cannot two-step, do-si-do, or complete a square properly, she will descend from the rafters like the Winona Judd of spiders and snatch you off the floor so that others can dance unhindered by your superfluous left foot. These people take this country dancing SERIOUSLY, and it makes them super crazy, to be honest.
Apparently, since the two late-night dance bars are Hydrate and Charlie’s, and Hydrate is too jam-packed with shirtless, sweating, party boys most nights for women to carve a path through, the bachelorette girls were heading to Charlie’s after holding court in other bars on the strip, and Charlie’s got tired of it. The bar claimed these women were coming to mock gays, like looking at monkeys in a zoo, laughing, pointing, and saying, “lookit all these fags!”. That’s not really the impression we ever got from these girls. Yes, they were obnoxious and rude a lot of the time. Yes, they made fools of themselves and would embarrass strangers with their “dare cards”. No, none of this was really that big of a deal in the big picture of things because if you didn’t want to deal with these girls, most of the bars in Boystown are GINORMOUS, so you can easily find another part of the bar where these girls are not. And, considering how loud they always were, it was not hard to hear them coming and tactfully distance yourself from their hot-pin swaths of destruction.
We also kind of think Charlie’s wanted some PR out of this, because it even made the local news, which rarely reports on the LGBTQ community. Until today, we thought this was the only time nationally that anyone raised an issue about “Ladies Night”, since Charlie’s made the case that its $20 admission fee for women was similar to men being charged to enter straight bars on “Ladies Night” while women got in free. Charlie’s said that it was “Men’s Night” at the bar, and the cover for men was thus discounted, while women had to pay $15 extra a head…making it prohibitively expensive for bachelorette parties to hit the bar late at night, coincidentally (when all of their funds are almost depleted).
The end result of all of this was that the bar Cocktail put up a “no bachelorettes” sign in solidarity with Charlie’s. The other bars continued to not say anything to the bachelorette parties that sporadically appeared, because business is business. The go-go boys in Boystown continue to hate all women when they dance, for reasons unrelated to weddings and being a bachelorette (it’s because women tip less than men, demand more acrobatics and stage presence like they are watching the Chippendales, and believe hooting and hollering, not handing over singles or fives, is the way to show appreciation to a stripper…men, on the other hand, are content to just watch him sway vaguely to the music in his jockstrap, normally leave the cash right on the stage and don’t feel the need to check on his his religion by shoving their hands down the front of his jock, and always leave more than a buck or two…which is the ceiling for tips from each of the bachelorette girls, from what we have learned through the years from the dancers some of us have dated).
To our knowledge, Charlie’s solved its problem, girls got the message they were not wanted, and we don’t think that $20 cover lasted long. It was not in place in 2008 when we included Charlie’s in pub crawls we did for the campaigns…at most, women paid $5 just like guys, but there was no cover before 1am so we made sure to get there before then anyway.
We honestly can’t say we have any opinion on Ladies’ Night charges for guys, since none of us like going to straight bars, and we don’t think this will ever apply to our lives. Those of us who’ve worked in bars and restaurants know that guys always outnumber women, as single ladies don’t typically go out by themselves to a bar, whereas single guys will go out night after night, by themselves, looking to meet girls. It’s basic supply and demand economics in terms of the restaurant and bar business: to get straight guys to come to a bar, you have to guarantee it won’t be a sausagefest. To do that, you need to attract women. What better way to attract women then to offer no cover and drink specials. More women come. The men are happy to see the women. More men will come because this is a bar that is known to attract women. The women who are going out to meet men are happy they have so many options to choose from. The bar makes a lot of money that night. Everyone wins, and guys don’t seem to miss the $5 cover they paid that night…especially not if they get a phone number or two out of it.
We don’t see how Ladies’ Night causes any male out there undue harm.
We also think, if lunatics REALLY insist on playing Nanny State and terminating Ladies’ Night legislatively, that bar owners have a ready-made solution to the problem, whereby they’d still get to make money off the men while not charging the women extra: URINAL SURCHARGES.
There are no urinals in the women’s rooms…but they exist in men’s rooms. Argue that urinals cost a lot of money to maintain, because of those wonderful-smelling little pink heart-shaped targeting cakes, so every male entering the premises (who will, no doubt, use one of those urinals that night) must fork over a $5 surcharge to keep those cakes stocked. Is that gender-based discrimination? Apparently, someone out there seems to be able to argue that everything under the sun is either discriminatory or victimizing in some way…but the Urinal Surcharge idea is so ridiculous and satirical that we can’t imagine any self-respecting guy to challenge this. If he did, he shouldn’t be using a urinal anyway. He should be snuggled in Pampers.
It’s fun when our adventures and experiences in Boystown serve up another, different take to some idiocy happening in government somewhere, especially when we get to dream up things like Urinal Surchages we just know the people who read us in the House are going to think are great ideas for new taxes for the lame duck session post-November. Tell Nancy we said hi!
Meryl Streep to play Baroness Thatcher in new film called "Iron Lady"
Hollywood’s reporting Meryl Streep’s next project will be portraying Baroness Thatcher in a new film called “Iron Lady”, which will depict her time as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Someone at the Academy should probably just start carving her name onto the Oscar already, because Meryl Streep + portraying a historical figure = Oscar nomination at the least. Considering the fact Helen Mirren and Forest Whitacker both won recently for playing Queen Elizabeth II and Idi Amin (respectively, as if that wasn’t already clear), and Dame Judi Dench has won for playing the OTHER Queen Elizabeth, this looks like a lock for Best Actress. And, of course, by this logic, Will Smith will win an Oscar for depicting America’s current queen, “Miss Thang”, whenever they get around to filming the Obama movie, which was at first rumored to be called “Hope and Change” but is now in development under the new working title “Chaos and Ineptitude”.
If you click over to AintItCoolNews.com for their take on this story, you’ll see a few interesting things. One of which is the oddball clip we’ve added above from the Bond movie “For Your Eyes Only”, which inserts a strange cameo of “Baroness Thatcher” at the end, portrayed by Janet Brown (who, clearly, did not win an Oscar for depicting the Baroness as a dinner-making housewife answering the red emergency phone in Downing Street’s kitchen). We’re not aware of any films depicting Tony Blair playing with dolls, sucking on his own toes, twirling around the living room pretending he’s a downed helicopter, or doing any of the things we imagine male world leaders do when away from their desks and unseen by the prying eyes of television cameras. If female leaders are always seen in films doing domestic work, then we can certainly speculate on what their male counterparts should be up to in vignettes like this. And you know damn well we’d cast Kenan Thompson, in a teal and fushia muumuu, house slippers, and cold cream sprawled on the floor of the Oval pining over Tiger Beat issues with the Jonas Brothers and Justin Beiber on the cover, with a black sharpie in one hand ever ready to color in the teeth and blacken out the eyes of any errant Kal Penn photos he finds on those pages. ”I’M SO OVER HIM!!!!!,” the “president” shouts, to no one in particular, while furiously ripping out the Kumar-tinged pages. ”I know, I know, Mr. President. Just like I’m over Steve Guttenberg, whom people say I kind of look like, only much creepier,” Rahm Emanuel soothes, in the “there, there, poor baby” way the current “president” demands to be treated — ever the victim, perpetually starved for attention, never getting exactly what he wants, not even from his Tiger Beats.
What’s also interesting over at AintItCool, as always, are the comments left by the 90%+ male, young, posting community.
Someone during the 2008 campaign asked us what the difference between sexism and misogyny was, and wanted a way to tell them apart. We sent them links to AintItCoolNews, for three or four random stories focusing on female actresses, Hillary Clinton, and Governor Sarah Palin. It’s a crash course in the way men rip into women, attack them anatomically, hurl the most vile pejoratives at them…all because they are female. Of course, similar attacks, on a racial level, would never be allowed against a black person. Men who aren’t liked by this bunch don’t have their penises referred to constantly, aren’t called “penises” as a put-down, and aren’t degraded into mere pieces of meat good only for sex. Of course not.
We never, ever go on Daily Kos or Democratic Underground because, as we understand it, what goes on over there on any given day is exponentially worse than what you will find on AintItCoolNews and other Leftist entertainment sites. AintItCool is the PG-13 version of what the Left hurls at women, especially conservative women, in America or the UK. The Kossaks and the DUnces out there operate on the XXX plane, in need not of mere interventions, but full-blown exorcisms.
If you can stomach it, scroll down the linked page and look at just the thread titles and how they degrade Baroness Thatcher, a woman most of these guys (average age seems to be 22-26) have only vaguely heard of (since their public school history classes seem to stop at the Carter Administration), but whom all of them hate because they at least know she was a good friend of President Ronald Reagan.
Don’t click on the actual comments page unless you want to read some of the most disgusting filth you can imagine directed, without provocation, at Thatcher…and for good measure, at Governor Palin as well.
NOTE: Nowhere in the article itself is Governor Palin mentioned. The movie will not feature an appearance by Governor Palin. There’s a good chance at some point in the future President Palin will screen this movie at the White House, but that’s not noted by the article’s author. We’re just sayin’.
BUT, because these guys — and you have to pardon our language because we know of no other way to put this — have their miniscule d***s out and are reveling in masturbatory misogyny together, going full-force against the Baroness, of course they feel the need to bring their other favorite target into the mix as well. So, they bring the Palin Derangement Syndrome as an ancillary illness to their Thatcher Hate.
Hope!
Change!
Obama voters one and all.
What’s really disturbing, and worth noting, about all of this is that these guys really DO EXIST. It’s not just one troll writing this stuff, because we read this site daily and see these guys lob this hatred toward women in almost every thread. There’s a true sickness inside all of these, for want of a better word, “men”. Who raised these guys? What school system produced them? Did none of them have mothers, grandmothers, aunts, sisters, cousins, or female friends? What exactly about the female anatomy so horrifies, threatens, and incites them to such violent thought and speech?
Over an upcoming film with Meryl Streep playing one of the most important and influential women in history.
God willing, may it forever be our mission, and your mission as well, to combat sexism and misogyny wherever we find it so that one day saying the things these guys put out there about Baroness Thatcher, Governor Palin, and other women will be as socially unacceptable and ban-worthy as one in their midst ranting about “n*****s” and using race as a means to mock, degrade, belittle, and scorn someone.
