Objectifying Women in Advertising

Dear America, please stop using women and sex to advertise your slimy burgers.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, here it is:

I attended panel a couple weeks ago about the way the media uses women, particularly the objectification thereof, to sell products. It's been marinating in my brain and a rant had to come out sooner or later, so here it is...


Why do we need to see half-naked women (and men for that matter) in a ad for clothing? Isn't that counter-intuitive? Why do we need sexual references embedded in an ad for a burger?! How is a greasy slimy burger sexy in the least?

Why do companies only advertise yogurt, and chocolate a lot of times, to women? Have you ever seen any man but Mr. Clean in a cleaning commercial? Why do magazines feel the need to lighten the skin of minority women on their covers?

For health food commercials, women are always supposedly tricking and nagging their husbands into being healthy. Women are never the ones driving pick up trucks. In fact, according to ads, men should be skeptical of any woman driving, especially their wives:

Uh, what?! I can use a drill. Does that make me less of a woman?

Not only are these ads perpetuating a stereotype of women to our culture, but it's also giving women a ridiculous standard to live up to. It's physically impossible to measure up to Barbie without plastic surgery. It's giving men an unrealistic picture of women. It's also perpetuating the "woman's work" myth. Not only is it pushing women into this domestic sphere that many have fought so hard to break out of, but it's excluding men from entering this domestic world. It's damaging to both sexes. Men can do laundry. They can clean up kitchen messes. But you would never know it if you ever watched a laundry detergent or cleaning product commercial. Objectifying and perpetuating stereotypes of women hurts both sexes. It's still not okay to be a boy with an Easy Bake Oven. It's not okay that girls still feel the need to act weak or unintelligent to gain favor. One of my favorite representations of this is in a Crimethinc poster that I have hanging on my bedroom wall:

This is only a symptom of a larger societal problem. Think women are equal in the workforce? Then why are women STILL only making .77 to every dollar a man makes for the same job? Why are there only a handful of female CEO's to match a huge number of males? Why do many major religions still exclude female ministers?

This is larger than just a few ill-advised ads. It's a huge societal problem that needs to be addressed.

Why do we feel the need to demean women to sell products? Obviously it must be working in some respects because it continues to pop up all across the board, from food to cars to web hosting.

I don't have the answer. I think the first step is to become more conscious of ads, to realize who is being targeted and how it is being done. It's easy to blindly and numbly watch TV or flip through a magazine, but we need to be more active as consumers because if there's anything we have in common, it's that we are consumers. We have to realize that these ads are not just silly things intended to get our money. They want our money, but they also carve a niche in the network of pop culture. Is this what we really want our culture to reflect of us?

Out of all of the ads I've come across, this one may be the most sickening to me:

I'll let you all come up with your own reactions to this because I can't even fathom why this would ever be thought of as acceptable.

So, are there any ads that you really hate? Any reactions to the ones I've listed? Thanks for reading!!

Snide Comments About Letang's Hair

How could you not love this?!

I love Kris Letang, super-mega-awesome defenseman for the Pittsburgh Penguins. He's a definite contender for the Norris trophy. He made it to the all-star game when he wasn't even on the ballot because so many people wrote him in. His stats are awesome. He's getting around 30 minutes per game now, and he's really stepping up to fill the gaps left by tons of team injuries. He seems pretty down to Earth, but he's still a total badass. All of this, and he's only 23.

...and the hair....

I love it. It makes me happy. And I don't appreciate the anti-hair comments from jealous fans of other teams, especially calling him greasy and whatnot. Get your own all-star defenseman...who also happens to be totally gorgeous and French-Canadian.

This was a totally pointless post. I just wanted to talk about Letang and share my madness. I've gotten into so many political arguments in the past few days that I don't really want to talk about it. So...

Here's some more gratuitous hair pictures. I don't know where I got them from. I have like 200 pictures of him on my computer. If they're your gratuitous hair pictures and you don't approve of them being on my blog, let me know and I'll take them down. I think a lot of them came from here:












You're welcome. I'm such a creep. Here's one more GIF just in case that wasn't enough:

People That Could Benefit From a Little Googleing

I'm an English and Journalism major, so I'm totally familiar with the art form of making it look like you've read something that you didn't. But, at least most of the time, I do some google-ing before I have to pretend to know something. Here are some people in and around politics that could have benefited from doing a little homework:

"...the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States....Men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."
--Michele Bachmann, during her Tea Party response to Obama's State of the Union Address

Oh yeah, and the moon's made out of cheese and I'm sitting here sharing a milkshake with James Dean. Really, THAT'S how ludicrous that statement is. That's more than just not knowing history, that's totally giving credit where credit is NOT due. Sure, Adams helped to get the conversation started about ending slavery, but of the so-called "founding fathers," many were slave owners, like Thomas Jefferson. The 13th Amendment (outlawing slavery) wasn't ratified until 1865. John Quincy Adams was already dead. Washington, Franklin, Monroe, Madison, Jefferson, and the first Adams were already dead. Even with the 13th Amendment, segregation was instated till the middle of the 60s, and we're still fighting civil rights battles today.

During her response, Bachmann also used the phrase "American exceptionalism." This works both ways; both they way your 1st grade teacher used it to describe your work of art, but also meaning that America as somehow an "exception." We've used this belief to do a lot of stupid things, and I was irritated that Bachmann used this in her speech.

"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died -- an entire town destroyed."
--President Obama, on a tornado in Kansas

I guess 10,000 died in Obamaland, but, here on Earth, it was 12. I'm all for upping the drama, but not to the effect of killing off 9,988 extra people. All you had to do was take out your Blackberry and Google it. THAT'S IT!


Glenn Beck's Thomas Paine worship...

I'm no expert on Paine. I've only read parts of Age of Reason and Common Sense in a couple classes. But, I'm expert enough to say that Beck is backing the wrong guy and he, quite obviously, has never actually read Paine. Both of these are quotes from Paine's "Age of Reason" .....

• "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church."

• "Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid or produces only atheists or fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of despotism, and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests, but so far as respects the good of man in general it leads to nothing here or hereafter."
  

Seeing any problems here? Beck is a Mormon. He said:

''I haven't seen Jesus and what he would do on a talk show on Fox, but I'm going to try.'' —Glenn Beck, FOX News Channel's Glenn Beck show, April 21, 2010

He ALWAYS plays the god card in his political rhetoric. And he's siding with an atheist? In fact, most of the so-called founding fathers were deists, not Christians. So, sorry Beck, it looks like Paine's just not that into you. Calling one of your books, "Common Sense," after Paine's work of the same name is just not cool. You should probably start wearing the costume of someone closer to your particular brand of crazy.... like Sarah Palin. Speaking of Sarah.....

“Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”
--Sarah Palin, about the bad press she was getting in lieu of the tragedy in Arizona

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47477.html#ixzz1Ck3kwkwb

This is the definition of "Blood Libel," from wikipedia:

"Blood libel (also blood accusation^[1][2]) is a false accusation or claim^[3][4][5] that religious minorities, usually Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays.^[1][2][6] Historically, these claims—alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration—have been a major theme in European persecution of Jews."

So, basically, Sarah Palin just compared her bad press to the persecution of the Jews. Let that sink in for a minute. Jewish people, your persecution and torture at the hands of many different groups, all throughout history, is being equated with Palin showing up in a few unfavorable articles about her use of gun-related rhetoric. If this doesn't label her as a sociopath, I don't know what does. I don't think I can even say anything else about this without breaking something.


(Edit: I didn't put Christine O'Donnell's denial of the separation of church and state on the list because it's another one of my posts, entirely dedicated to her crazy antics)


This list could be a thousand times longer, and all of these people are repeat offenders. I just picked the ones that made me the most angry. If you can think of anything else that belongs on the list, make your case in the comments section. I just thought of one I didn't put on the list...the Tea Party for not bothering to use Google to find the meaning of another tea-related word.

Thanks for reading!!

Crazy Spending Cuts & Opposition to Unions

The GOP-led House of Representatives has blocked Planned Parenthood and Americorps from federal funding. PBS and NPR are also on the chopping block. The Tea Party, who is supposedly against big government, is supporting the way big government is trying to overthrow unions in Wisconsin.

Uh, are you kidding me?! America has gone loco.

Unions are the reason we have weekends and paid overtime and vacation. They're the reason for pension plans. Like your breaks? Thank a union. We NEED unions. Want to know what happens when we don't have unions? Take a look at Wal-Mart. They've paid hundreds of millions of dollars in lawsuits filed by employees who all had to work in unsafe conditions for long hours. That's not all they do either. If you even talk about forming a union you're either fired or put at an isolated position. There are a few good documentaries on Wal-Mart that I've seen, if you're interested, one is Wal-Mart: The High Price of Low Costs.

(I have to admit to being a hypocrite when it comes to Wal-Mart. They're terrible, but I'm in college, without a job or income, and Wal-mart is cheaper than Marten's, campus stores or Giant Eagle. It's the truth. I feel terrible, but what am I supposed to do? Giant Eagle was almost on campus, but they moved it farther away last year. So, not only is their food more expensive, but I have to waste gas to get there?! Sorry. Wal-Mart it is.)

But anyway, this post is about the GOP, not Wal-Mart. There are a million different things that could be done to cut costs, like slashing the pay of the millionaire senators and representatives. But that will never happen. They could spend less on wars and military operation, but that will never happen. Nope, they would rather cut spending on programs dedicated to helping low-income families and providing information and educational programming to the masses.

Check this out: The list of 70 spending cuts the GOP is hoping to make. It should make you livid.

According to that link from the Wall Street Journal, the GOP wanted to cut the EPA's funding by 1.6 billion dollars. Community health care services would also take a big hit, along with cleaner energy initiatives. Scientific and medical research (like National Institute of Health) was heavily reduced. Even things like state and local law enforcement were targeted. Instead of cutting back department of defense funding, which sucks up the largest amount of money, they targeted organizations and funds meant to help people.

It's been said that the right is launching a full-on attack on women. Whether you abhor abortion or not, we NEED Planned Parenthood. Cutting its funding is ridiculous. They provide services like free STD testing, cancer screenings, prenatal care and educational services. Families need to be planned, and that's why they were here. But the house of reps decided that they didn't care about families. If you're as pissed as I am, it takes two seconds to fill out this form to send open letters to both reps that voted for the bill and senators that still have a hope of crushing the bill. The decision sparked some of the best political rhetoric I've encountered. Here's the two that caught my attention. This is Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI):



I just don't understand trying to get rid of Planned Parenthood. Largely, the GOP wants to eradicate abortion. Okay, but, they want to make it as hard as possible for poor families and poor mothers to be able to get help to raise their children, and to have prenatal care. It's ludicrous.

One of the more shocking speakers against the bill was Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) after these words from the ever-crazy Chris Smith who sites a lot of numbers and examples he doesn't care to explain. I'll probably rip his video apart in another post. I don't have time to deal with his craziness right now. But anyway, this is what Speier said in response to Smith:




Obviously, I agree that we need to cut the spending. China pretty much owns the U.S. through loans. But we're cutting it in the wrong places. Get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Reduce military spending. I know we need a strong military and I totally support the troops, but this war has been going on for too damn long and it's costing this country a whole lot of money. Cutting funding to build government buildings is on their 70 list. Lets see more things like that.

I mentioned in another post that I know little to nothing about the economy. That's true. But I know about people. I know about growing up in a bad neighborhood where limited resources are available. I know several people that had children at a young age. Largely, the last programs that should be cut are that the GOP wants to get rid of the fastest. Low income families need help. The environment needs help. Local policemen need help. We need clean energy and we need medical and scientific research. I'm pissed. You should be too. The senate still needs to vote on these things, but it still makes me angry that the GOP is trying very hard to cut all of these programs that we need to have. It's just not the right direction for this country.

Not related, but there will probably be small Pittsburgh Penguins-related posts at the end of my larger posts. Sometimes I just need to rant. I have a frighteningly large emotional attachment to hockey. So here's my two cents on the Pens:


They traded Gogo. I like him. I didn't love him, but I liked him. I guess he had it coming though. We got two new guys, both from the Dallas Stars. Their names are James Neil (left wing) and Matt Niskanen (defenseman). Let's hope it was worth it. I'm also really happy Staalsy is okay after getting a puck to the face in yesterday's game. He's able to come back to play tonight. AND Cookie is free, which makes me happy.

We play the Caps tonight.

I may cry if we lose. Pens, my mental well-being is at stake. That Blackhawks game was too close. Fleury was awesome, but I was so angry with TK and Bylsma for even picking TK for the shootout....but I'd be willing to forgive them both for a win tonight. Gahhh...I can't stand Ovechkin and his massive ego. He must lose.

Apathy

I just want to preface this by saying I'm a junior at IUP. I'm an English and journalism double major and a history and women's studies double minor. This alone probably explains a little of why apathy irritates me as much as it does.

Anyway, enough about me, I heard something in the library today while I was eating my obligatory onion bagel; a boy said "My goal is to never read a novel again."

Just take the weight of that in: A white boy, in college, in modern America, never wants to read a novel again. There is something seriously wrong with this.

Do you realize how fortunate you are to have access to higher education? Do you even acknowledge that, just because you were born male, white and American, that you have categorical advantages in most aspects of culture? But you just don't care, and so you don't know.

It's not an isolated incident. It's my whole generation. We just don't care. If it's not affecting our access to pizza or beer, it doesn't matter. So, generation, I'm calling you out.

I was born in 1990, so I can remember a time before every seven-year-old had a cell phone, before social media and the rest of the internet sucked us in to its time warp. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, I have a blog, a Twitter, a Facebook and a LinkedIn. Obviously, I spend a lot of time on the internet. But I also care about a lot of issues that are bigger than myself. I just think we have to find a balance and not let thought and discussion become a casualty of this age of immediacy.

Daily, I watch kids texting on their phones during the whole class period. Why don't you just drop out? You're paying $20,000 to text. All you're getting out of your classes are useless facts because you're not paying attention and you're not learning how to apply anything. Put down all of your contraptions and listen. You never know, maybe you'll actually learn something.

Even better, you just might learn something that compels you to do something. You may even learn something that compels you to change yourself.

Look, as far as opinions go, I don't care if you don't agree with me as long as you have a valid argument with facts to back it up. But no one cares enough to get the facts and form an opinion. I can't imagine not having an opinion about abortion or gay rights, or any number of other things. Don't hate on the repeal on DADT, "because it's stupid." Have a concrete reason if you think there is one.

You need to read. Or at least listen to NPR or something. Please don't stop at broadcast news. Balance it out.

This apathy is not totally our fault. The things that are considered "news" in this country are absolutely ridiculous. I mean, balloon boy?! Come on. I don't care about that Snookie character with the appendage growing out of her head. I want to know about Egypt, abortion legislation, gay rights, environmental activism, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that this country has completely forgotten about, ect. These things matter. Figure out what matters to you. Some things, like the war, should matter to everyone. Get an opinion and form it around something concrete. Do some homework on some -ism's.

(I had an article published about this skewed version of the news, you can check it out here if you're interested.)

Really, pretty much out of my own desperation, I'm just asking people to care a little more.

If you don't want to learn, get out of my college. You can go drink and smoke with your friends and not have to pay $20,000. I'm sick of "I go to IUP," being followed up with "Ohh, that's a big party school, right?" I'm here because I like learning and it suits me as a person.

Your parents or the state, or someone, is investing in your brain. I don't want to be 50 years old, when my generation's running the country, and electing a U.S. president that runs on a platform of "Meh." So please, PLEASE, care about something that matters, and please don't ever stop learning.


Photo from here.

Update on Pens/Islanders

Check out: http://penguins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=552579&navid=DL|PIT|home for the rulings. All of the info I got for this post came from that site.

So, Godard's out for 10 games for leaving the bench and will be fined $40,322.25. This is a pretty standard action for a player that leaves the bench to fight, so I wasn't too surprised. Luckily, Coach Bylsma isn't getting suspended or fined. I'm glad that no other players were suspended.

I'm also glad the NHL came down pretty hard on the Islanders. Gillies, the guy that gave Tangradi a concussion then stood on the side of the ice and made fun of him, is out for nine games and got a pretty hefty reduction in his salary. Martin's out for four games and has to pay a little over what Godard is paying in fines. The Islanders, as a team, is being fined $100,000.

I guess nothing's happening to Haley, for going after Johhny and subsequently making Godard leave the bench to defend him, but Haley doesn't matter as much as Martin and Gillies. I'm not totally satisfied with the ruling because I think both Martin and Gillies deserve longer suspensions.

I guess Max wasn't hurt too badly, but the Martin sucker punch to the head was obnoxious and totally uncalled for. It could have ended Max's career if he hadn't reacted so quickly. I think he deserves a little more than four games.

But whatever. I'm glad the NHL sent a message that they won't tolerate players that take head-shots at other players who are defenseless at the time, like Tangradi and Max were. Fighting is a part of the game, but it should only happen when both players agree to it, and only goalies are going after goalies.

Here's a vid from the NHL network talking about the fines and suspensions:


The Pens play the NY Rangers today at 3. Tangradi's out.


I was going to try to post videos or links of Islanders players talking about the suspensions, but I can't find any. The Islanders site doesn't seem to have interviews from them or anything. Youtube doesn't either. Sorry.

For some more articles about the game, but only from the Pens, check out:

Godard talking about why he left the bench:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/penguins/s_722687.html?source=rss&feed=8

Letang talking about the game:


Interviews with Godard, Bylsma and Max:
http://penguins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=552506

Edit 2/13 at 2:13 p.m. : Here's what Mario Lemieux, Pens co-owner (who I affectionately refer to as Le Magnifique) had to say:
http://penguins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=552602&cmpid=pit-twt-pghpenguins

Pens/Islanders on 2/11/11

Hockey is a rough sport. You get hit. Guys fight. And that's great. But tonight was ridiculous. I'm livid. I've never been so angry about a game before. Ever.

Edit 2/12: I'm a Pens fan, so this is going to be biased. Just a warning.

The pretext to this was the goalie fight the last time the Pens played the Islanders. At the end of the game, Johnson and DiPietro fought, and Johnny laid a solid hit on DiPietro, sending him to the ground. Upon entering the fight DiPietro was smiling like Johnny wasn't actually going to hit him, but apparently Johnny didn't get the memo. The whole Pens bench was laughing and hugging Johnny because he had come to the aid of Matt Cooke, who DiPietro had tripped. No one knew DiPietro was hurt. They were just laughing because two goalies had fought and it was damn funny. DiPietro suffered a facial fracture, which sucks, but that kind of thing happens. Here's their goalie fight:



Well, coming into the game, the Islanders were pissed. I guess I would be too. Their goalie dropped like he was hit by Tyson. They were also mad because of Max's CLEAN hit on Comeau. Comeau got up fine, but had concussion symptoms later on. This sucks for the Islanders, but there's no doubt that the the Islanders were totally out for blood tonight. It was just insane.

It started with a few smaller fights in the 1st period, and escalated into a free-for-all by the third. These were the things that really made me angry:

• Two-handed slash to Letang's leg by Tavares after Letang gave him a clean hit. Tanger was having trouble getting up, but returned for the 2nd period. Tavares went in the box for (I think) 2 minutes. Tanger got a goal.
  

• Sucker punch to Max from Martin. Max put a hit on someone, Martin then comes behind Max and tries to sucker punch him in the head. He ends up pulling his jersey and Max goes to the ground. Then all hell breaks loose. Dupuis, Rupp and Engelland fight some Islanders. Everyone gets misconducts. What a birthday for Max Talbot. Here's the sucker punch:
  

• After fighting Max to the ground after another hit, Haley decided to engage Johnson. Coming to Johnny's aid was Godard who left the bench, because IT'S UNACCEPTABLE FOR PEOPLE TO GO AFTER GOALIES, UNLESS YOU ARE A GOALIE. Godard's facing a 10-game suspension. Bylsma will probably get a suspension and a $10,000 fine. The team itself will also probably be fined.

• After yet another hit, Tangradi is wrestled to the ground. Obviously hurt, he's doubled over on the ice and Gillies is standing by the gate gloating and bitching at Tangradi with his awful movie-villain mustache. After the game, Bylsma reported that Tangradi is showing concussion-like symptoms.
  

• They tried to kill Max Talbot. That wasn't just hockey fighting. That was really, seriously, trying to hurt another human being. Not cool.
  

Those were the worst, for me at least. There was a lot of stuff to choose from. The refs had no control of the game. Guys were getting seriously injured. There were only a couple players left on the bench toward the end of the third period because everyone had been thrown out of the game.

It was hard to watch. Anyone that praises this game is an idiot. NYI, I'm sure it feels nice to win a game, but your players were completely out of line. You're an embarrassment to the league. And none of you have even apologized. Say what you want about Matt Cooke, but he's a saint next to some of the guys that were involved tonight. Yeah, the hit on Savard sucked, but he was going for a shoulder to shoulder hit. Cooke also said, after hitting Tyutin, that he was glad no one got hurt. That's more than anyone's said on the Islanders. (Edit: I know Cooke's kind of a douche, but he wasn't even playing tonight. I only brought him up because people were saying, on Twitter, that Pens fans has no right to complain because Cookie's on our team.)

Here's the list of the record-breaking number of penalties tonight: http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/hockey/nhl/game/Penguins_Islanders/2011/02/11

Letang's my favorite player, so that's why I'll use him. There was a point where Letang had been hit hard and was laying on the ice, while Johnson, after being plowed into by some Islander in the net (edit: Said Islander was pushed by a Pens player, so it's not his fault. Thanks, SkySareBlue), looked hurt. Letang, still unable to get up, crawled over to Johnny to make sure he was okay, and the rest of the guys brawled by the glass. That's what being a team looks like; when you're hurting but you still crawl over to your bro to make sure he's okay. It's at 5:12 in this video. Also in this video are all of the other fights in the game:



For all of the crap that went on this game, at least the boys know how to defend their own. I still maintain that 95% (Edit: okay...maybe 90%) of the nonsense was started by Islanders, especially in Martin's case. Just watch the game. It's there. Pens lost 9-3. They played bad. But that game was an embarrassment to the NHL. There's no way that should have escalated to that point.

Haley should have been taken to the box. He wouldn't have been able to go after Johnny. Then Godard wouldn't have had to come to his aid and we wouldn't have a suspended player, coach and a hefty fine. Hopefully the NHL takes that into account when making its final decisions.

Also, they had it in for Talbot. If Max wouldn't have reacted as quickly, that hit could have been Bertuzzi/Moore vol. 2. If you don't know, this is the Bertuzzi cheap-shot:



Bertuzzi ended Moore's career. Moore suffered a broken neck, concussion, and facial cuts. Given what Martin tried to do, this could have been Max Talbot. Absolutely ridiculous.

Pens/Isles play again on 4/8/11. I want to go. They hurt Letang again, you better believe you'll see my ass hobbling on the ice, trying to fight somebody.

And seriously, when Letang tells the ref to "go f*** himself," you know something's up. He's not that kind of guy.

(All edits are from 2/12. In my defense, it was like 1 a.m. when I finished this post, not the 8:53 that is says, and I was still livid. Probably should have waited till today to say anything, but I needed to rant.)

Methinks you should boycott Chick-Fil-A

Hey, a group of us at IUP are organizing a campaign to get Chick-Fil-A removed from our campus because of the way they foster gender discrimination. If you're interested in doing something with us or on your own, you can check out http://iuprapidresponse.wordpress.com/ for more info. Thanks!!



Update 2/13/11: Here's a video I found that talks about the controversy. It does a good job of showing both sides of the issue:

Fast Zombies

I have what one might call an obsession with the undead, as you may have been able to guess from the Reagan post. Not just the movies, but using makeup to become one of them on holidays and events that don't happen often enough. But I hate, HATE, fast zombies.

I firmly believe that directors turn to fast zombies because they don't have the story, character development and the talent to keep people interested. So, they have to amplify their movie by throwing in zombies that are more like gazelles.

That said, 28 Days Later is one of my favorite movies ever. They get away with it because their version of zombies never actually die, they become "infected." And, it's done really really well, so I'll let them live. But largely, zombies should stay slow. If you want fast monsters, try slashers, werewolves, vampires and that nonsense. Zoms get you in numbers, not speed. That's why they're truly terrifying and that's what sets them apart.

One reason that fast zombies irritate me is that they are a paradox. Zombie = undead. Undead = gross, rotting corpse. I don't know about the rest of physicality, but I'm pretty sure that when you die you don't gain the speed of a gazelle. It's ridiculous that they would be fast. They're dead. They also can't climb fences like they do in Zombieland or that new Walking Dead show on AMC (though I do love that show otherwise).

Zombies are illogical (The only exception I'll allow is Bub in Day of the Dead, and ONLY cause it's Romero), slow moving, dead, rotting, festering things. Not greyhounds. If you start to give a zombie speed and logic then it's not a zombie movie. It's a really ugly cannibal that had a bad day. Jeez. There are some genre conventions that don't need to be messed with.

All of this production value crap is also pretty irritating. Zombies need to get back to their low-budget roots and leave Hollywood to Hollywood. Zombies used to be a medium for cultural comment, not just a run-of-the-mill blood and guts movie. Think of Romero's Dawn of The Dead and its metaphors of zombie consumerism, or Night of the Living dead and the insanity of racism. With all of the pansy vampires and werewolves going around these days (Dracula is undoubtedly rolling in his coffin), why would zom's even want to be part of Hollywood? It's ridiculous. All of the zombie effects I've done use only liquid latex, paper towels, cotton balls, cheap foundation, fake blood, and basic Halloween makeup and I've always gotten compliments on my goriness. You don't need to computer generate zombies. Making a zombie should never be a lost craft :D

If you're going to do a large-budget zombie movie, stick with the conventions but improve upon other things....like the human response and the reasons the zombie outbreak had happened in the first place.

I Am Legend infuriates me. I saw it in 2007, when it came out, and totally forgot until I was doing a huge research paper (on female roles in zombie movies) that the supposed zombies were actually vampires, even though people are much more likely to describe them as zoms rather than vampires. The genres need to be kept separate. Make your vampires, vampires, and make your zombies, zombies. Don't try to mix. Don't try to introduce romantic feelings between zompires. Don't take UV sensitivity and bloodthirst and wrap it in a zom body. It's dumb. It was supposed to be based on a book anyway. From what I gather, it didn't stick to the book in the least, it also confused a whole lot of people about the nature of zoms.

Zombie movies don't have to always be scary, either. I love Fido and Shaun of The Dead.


Finally, a zom's only motivation is to feed. They are relentless, but albeit easy to avoid if the proper precautions are taken (which in movie land, they don't). They go down quickly when they're shot in the head, but they don't stop until that moment, when the brain stem is shut off. That gives them enough. They get you in numbers. They creep into your houses through a backdoor or broken window. People attract them by making noise or advertising their location. Zoms don't need to be fast. People are reckless enough to die by the slow shuffling ones. Even in Shaun of the Dead, while they're making fun of the genre, people still die by the slow zoms because they're just not careful.

Zombies are scary because it's almost plausible. When you walk into a crowded place, try to imagine the people around you as zoms. It's not hard to do, especially on Black Friday. All of these shuffling people...with a little makeup, they could totally pass for them. That doesn't exist when they're these fast hybrid things.

Oh, do I loathe Zach Snyder....he took Dawn Of the Dead, gave it fast zombies, sex appeal, and a ton of undeveloped characters and called it a remake. He's also the same guy that did Zombieland. Moy, moy terrible.

This is what Romero said:
What do you think about fast zombies — the kind we see in video games and movies like 28 Days Later?
Well, I took a big swipe at them in this film: There’s a running gag in the movie that dead things don’t move fast. Partially, it’s a matter of taste. I remember Christopher Lee’s mummy movies where there was this big old lumbering thing that was just walking towards you and you could blow it full of holes but it would keep coming. And in the original Halloween, Michael Meyers never ran, he just sort of calmly walked across the lawn or across the room. To me, that’s scarier: this inexorable thing coming at you and you can’t figure out how to stop it. Aside from that, I do have rules in my head of what’s logical and what’s not. I don’t think zombies can run. Their ankles would snap! And they haven’t yet taken out memberships to Curves.

Read more: George A. Romero Explains Why Fast Zombies Could Never Exist (Hint: Weak Ankles) -- Vulture http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2008/02/george_a_romero_explains_why_f.html#ixzz0jR4CMOLS

Interested in more zombie-age? Check out my Flickr account for zombie pictures from past Monroeville Zombie Walks and various zombie experimentation.

2010's zombie walk in downtown Pittsburgh's market square:http://www.flickr.com/photos/36140385@N06/sets/72157625040603891/

2009's zombie walk at the Monroeville mall: http://www.flickr.com/photos/36140385@N06/sets/72157622449304161/

Your faithful author in undead form, from the South Side Zombie Walk in 2009:

Also, Pens fans, Matt Cooke got suspended for four games for his hit on Tyutin. Livid? Me too. No one got hurt, we're already missing 5 players due to injury, and now we're missing 6 because of this stupid ruling. NHL, I know you guys hate Cookie, but at least keep your sanctions against players consistent. LOIUASBPDIWUsdn

So what do you think about the fast vs. slow zombies? Or Matt Cooke? Or fast zombie Matt Cooke on ice?

Ronald Reagan

So, Reagan's 100th birthday would have been on Sunday the 6th. I don't know who would be more out of touch with the American public, actual Reagan or 100 year old zombie Reagan...though perhaps zombie Reagan would solve my burning question: "Does Sarah Palin actually have a brain, or is she a cyborg controlled by Darth Vader and Glenn Beck ?"



Jelly Belly brain flavored beans...oh man. Gold mine? Methinks so.

(I have a weird fascination with the connection between Reagan and his jelly bean obsession.)

Sorry, I had to have a zombie reference. But, there is a real problem with America's Reagan worship. He could speak. He looked pretty trustworthy. But behind that was a man who really set this country back a few years in his policies and actions. He shouldn't be worshiped and canonized in this country. Why? Read on:

1. He didn't care about the environment. This was the man that said:

"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do" (1981)

Um. What?! This probably explains why Reagan decided it would be awesome to give corporations pretty much free reign over national land for drilling, clear cutting and other nonsense. He also appointed James Wall and Anne Gorsuch to head the department of interior. Neither of them knew what they were doing and neither much cared. Reagan also drastically cut back money given to the EPA to deal with environmental disasters and conservation efforts. (I'm in an Environmental Lit class this semester, read Greening of A Nation for a pretty good history of environmentalism in the U.S. It was required reading for my class. )

2. He illegally and secretly sold arms to Iran. Of course, nothing could ever be proven because witnesses were threatened and whatnot, but the other big names thought to be involved have committed suicide. He also did some under-the-table stuff with Iraq and contributed to the rampant militarization of the middle east along with George Bush vol. 1. (http://www.news24.com/World/News/Reagan-set-roots-for-al-Qaeda-20040607
has a good article if you're interested)

3. He was one of the most anti-abortion presidents ever.

"I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born. "
~Ronald Reagan, quoted in New York Times, 22 September 1980 (http://www.quotegarden.com/)

Let's unwrap this. One, he's making that bogus claim that life starts at the moment of conception. Well, with that logic, everything (EVERYTHING) that results in loss of sperm or egg is a child lost. It's preventing the life of a child. Nonsense. Two, thank you captain obvious. The only people that have access to worldly dissent and decision are the living. Take out "abortion" and replace it with "zombie rights legislation" and it's still true. This makes it a stupid thing to say. Three, Reagan is a man. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of men telling me what I, a woman, can do with my body. So STFU.


4. He didn't care about the AIDS epidemic. From Examiner.com:

"Consider that Mayor Dianne Feinstein's AIDS budget for the City of San Francisco was bigger than President Reagan's AIDS budget was for the entire nation..."

He just didn't care. He had complete apathy toward the issue, even when one of his friends, Rock Hudson, had died from the disease.


5. He ended detente with Russia and, instead of using diplomacy, he out-spent the USSR and sent the U.S. into an economic meltdown that lasted till the 90s. Reaganomics didn't work despite what Fox has told you.

6. There's considerable evidence (called October Surprise) that points Reagan to the Iran Hostage Crisis. Iranian students and military people had taken 52 people from the U.S. and held them hostage from November 1971 till January 1981 when Reagan took office. Why'd they let them go right then? A lot of people say Reagan bargained with Iran to hold the hostages until then so Reagan would look like some sort of savior for getting their freedom. True or not, given his track record, it still makes me wonder.

7. He was on another planet for much of his presidency. The man couldn't differentiate movies from real life. He even implemented Star Wars and called Russia the evil empire, which was just totally awesome foreign policy.

8. Here are just a few of Reagan's kernels of wisdom that should make you livid, from here:

"There is absolutely no circumstance whatever under which I would accept that spot. Even if they tied and gagged me, I would find a way to signal by wiggling my ears." --on possibly being offered the vice presidency in 1968

"Facts are stupid things."

"All the waste in a year from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk."
Quoted in the Burlington (Vermont) Free Press, February 15, 1980 (he was a presidential candidate). (In reality, the average nuclear reactor generates 30 tons of radioactive waste per year.)


"Fascism was really the basis for the New Deal."
quoted in Time, May 17, 1976

"I favor the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it must be enforced at the point of a bayonet, if necessary."
Los Angeles Times, October 20, 1965

MLK would be rolling in his grave. Combating violence with violence? Not cool.



This list could go on, but those were the big things that stuck out to me. Reagan did do a few good things while in office, but based on the way politicians try to align themselves with him, you'd think he was infallible. He wasn't. He made a lot of dumb mistakes and set this country back a substantial amount in the 80's and it would be well-advised for the American public to recognize that he wasn't such a great president.



Want more? Check out http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html for a really good article.

p.s. there are a lot of links to Wikipedia, not because Wikipedia is the best and most trusted source ever, but because it does a good job of giving a general overview of the linked events.

Superbowl

The Superbowl was a whole new level of WTF-ness. From the national anthem to game itself to the half-time show to the commercials, it was all seemingly constructed by someone with a very sick sense of humor.

1. Christina Aguilera screwed up the national anthem. She skipped a verse. She can sing, but I'd appreciate it if she sang the right words. This is the point where it started to go downhill for Pittsburgh, because she's from the area.



Uh, Christina, you forgot the "O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming."

2. I'm a huge Steelers fan, like one those obnoxious ones that yell thinking that Ben Roethlisberger is going to look at the screen and say, "Thanks Kelsey, I'll keep that in mind." The game was terrible. The Steelers were playing defense against themselves, and Green Bay outplayed them in every way. The better team won. I'm just glad it wasn't the Patriots. At least I respect Green Bay.

3. The half-time was awful. Fergie stomped on one of my favorite songs ever in her platform-heeled boot. She then proceed to drive her spiked heel into my heart. Okay, I may be getting dramatic, but when you bring out one of the greatest guitar players of all time, Slash (Guns and Roses), "sing" Sweet Child O' Mine and grind in his general direction, you deserved to be tackled by James Harrison. Black Eyed Peas were terrible live. Then they threw in Usher, but by that point by brain had been turned to scrambled eggs by the travesty and the Tron light show happening in front of me. No wonder so many kids are being diagnosed with A.D.D. After watching that half-time show, I think I may have it too.

Here's the vid...
Caution: Your brain may turn into scrambled eggs. Do not operate heavy machinery.



4. There were some funny commercials.

This was my fave:


With 15 million views on youtube, it seems like a lot of people agree with me. A little creativity goes a long way.

But there were some bad commercials. The worst for me was this one from Groupon:


It's a slap in the face to Tibet. I don't care if you make fun of Ozzy Osbourne's lack of skills with technology, or throw a Pepsi can at someone, but don't make light of the million people that have died in Tibet under Chinese occupation. You don't poke fun at Free Tibet. People's human rights are in question. It would be like poking fun at Darfur or other places of genocide. It's not funny. This was a commercial made in bad taste and Groupon is going to lose a lot of business as this thing continues to blow up.

(Check out http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/02/07/133560977/groupons-tibet-super-bowl-ad-harmless-fun-or-offensive for a follow-up)

Groupon also decided to make fun of deforestation in Brazil and the Save the Whales campaign.






Umm, WTF. Groupon, I hope you go bankrupt and whoever developed these commercials never works in communications again. Not only did your judgment lapse in one commercial, but in three. Your market research, if you did any, must have been faulty. I can't think of any reason why you would pick the the death of whales, the massacre of Tibetans and the destruction of the rain forest to make fun of. It's just idiotic.


Oh, and what statement did Groupon release in response to the backlash from the Tibet ad:

• "The gist of the concept is this: When groups of people act together to do something, it's usually to help a cause. With Groupon, people act together to help themselves by getting great deals. So what if we did a parody of a celebrity-narrated, PSA-style commercial that you think is about some noble cause (such as "Save the Whales"), but then it's revealed to actually be a passionate call to action to help yourself (as in "Save the Money")? Since we grew out of a collective action and philanthropy site (ThePoint.com) and ended up selling coupons, we loved the idea of poking fun at ourselves by talking about discounts as a noble cause. So we bought the spots, hired mockumentary expert Christopher Guest to direct them, enlisted some celebrity faux-philanthropists, and plopped down three Groupon ads before, during, and after the biggest American football game in the world." (from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/07/groupons-tibet-super-bowl-ad-_n_819813.html)

So, basically they're saying, "We're not going to apologize, it's your fault if you don't get our warped sense of humor." Well Groupon, apparently I'm not the only one thinks a million dead is not something to laugh about, from Twitter, retweeted 100+ times:

BorowitzReport:

#SuperBowl I guess Groupon decided to do a funny commercial about Tibet because Darfur would be in bad taste? #adFAIL



devbost:

Dear @Groupon - over a million Tibetans have been killed during Chinese occupation. Your ad wasn't funny. http://bit.ly/e3HVjZ #SuperBowl

No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion

I think the GOP has to reevaluate their platform. They want a limited government, but they want to tell women that they have to carry children. They also want to tell us who we can and can't love, but that's a post for later.

I'm talking about this "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion" nonsense.

Abortions are expensive. This bill is less about tax dollars and more about eradicating abortion entirely. It targets the poor. The women that are using government aid to have abortions are women that obviously could not afford it otherwise. I don't think it's up to anyone but these women to choose to have a child or not.

It also takes away money from Planned Parenthood because some of them provide abortion services. Planned Parenthood also offers help and education to a lot of people. It's just insane to take away this organization.

I've heard the argument from a spending perspective, something like "well, we have to start cutting somewhere." But if these women with limited financial capabilities were forced to undergo full-term pregnancy, who do you think will be paying the taxes to support their kids? They don't just disappear. They have to live somehow.

Some people have made the argument that they don't want their tax dollars funding something they don't believe in. With that logic, the entire system of government would collapse. Example? Imagine if people that send their children to private schools decided they didn't want to pay school tax to support public schools. I don't support the war in Iraq, but I have to pay tax to fund the military. I don't agree with a whole host of past wars and foreign policy nonsense that we're STILL paying for. But I still pay taxes. You don't get to opt out of taxes if you don't support the cause, sorry. They only thing you can do at that point is move somewhere else.

I don't care about the religious argument. It doesn't matter. If you outlaw abortion, what do you think will happen? That people will suddenly agree with you and admit to some warped sense wrongdoing? No. It'll be a coat hanger in a back alley. Abortions are going to happen whether you like it or not, and I don't think anyone but the patient has any right to judge.

• Depending on where you live, it's really not easy to get an abortion. There are more than 5 times the number of "family centers" than there are of places that offer abortion procedures. State laws also provide a lot of legality issues and other things like mandatory counseling, parental notification, and limiting public spending on abortion services.

• It's not like people just decide to get an abortion. It's a big decision. This whole notion of "Oh, if the government pays for it, everyone will do it" is just ridiculous.
  

• Abortion does not cause breast cancer, but it may put a woman at a higher risk. But, so may smoking, genetics, previous conditions, having no children, long-term hormone treatments, getting your period before you're 12, alcohol, being overweight and a whole host of other things. Scientists still don't know what causes cancer, and they still don't agree on whether abortion is a factor. (http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/MoreInformation/is-abortion-linked-to-breast-cancer)
  

Check out the documentary 12th & Delaware if you're interested in the abortion debate. It's a really great documentary. It gives both sides a lot of face time.

Also, here's the proposed bill in it's entirety http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/text.

Redefining Rape

The GOP was trying to pass a law that made forcible rape the only "real" kind of rape eligible for abortion. If a 12 year old girl is seduced and impregnated by an older man, or even her uncle, she has the have a child. Date rape? Have to have it. This is not only dangerous, but it gives more rights to rapists. It's already hard to prove a rape case because of the he said/she said ( or he/he or she/she) nature of it.

What if we decided that unarmed robbery was no longer stealing or theft but borrowing? How would that impact the law? Language is everything.


For more info, check out http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion. It's one-sided but it's a good article.

Chick-Fil-A

In case you've been living under a rock, let me give you a quick recap of the Chick Fil A fiasco.

They've been exposed to support organizations that foster homophobic hate, the ironically named Pennsylvania Family Institute. Chick-Fil-A support their so-called marriage classes that focus on bringing back the Bible's version of marriage. Supprt was given to the Pennsylvania Family Institute in the form of food donations to the marriage meetings.

Protests are happening all over the country, especially on college campuses, to kick out the franchise for mixing fast food and the conservative agenda.

I love waffle fries. I don't want to pick between virtue and potato any day. But when businesses make poor choices, it's our duty to let them know they've done wrong. And how? Hit them in the pocket books. Stop buying their stuff. Get your trans fat fix somewhere else.


So, Chick Fill A, I say stick to what you do best, making waffle fries, and leave the politics to Washington. And I'm really going to miss your fries and lemonade.

So kiddies, spread the word and don't eat the chicken.


check out http://news.change.org/stories/chick-fil-a-partners-with-rabid-anti-gay-group for more info. Do some google-ing too because it's an up-and-coming controversy.


My next post will be on the "No Taxpayer funding for Abortion" nonsense. I'm in the process of trying to get enough info to figure out what's actually going on, so stay tuned.

Christine O'Donnell's Greatest Hits

Christine O'Donnell: The person that makes even Sarah Palin look like a rocket scientist.

Thankfully she lost the last election but her idiocy will live on in infamy. Here's just some kernels of her awe-inspiring wisdom, and my snarky comments next to bullets:

"It is not enough to be abstinent with other people, you also have to be be abstinent alone. The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery, so you can't masturbate without lust."

The 13 Best Political Parodies Of The 2010 Midterm Elections (VIDEO)

Top 5 Basketball Courts in Doha, Qatar

Keeping Fear Alive: 14 People & Things Doing Their Part (PHOTOS)

Five Terrifying New Horror Movies You Dare Not See

Crazed Violent Stick Figures (PHOTOS)

The 15 Greatest 'South Park' Movie Parodies (VIDEOS)

"We took the Bible and prayer out of public schools. Now we're having weekly shootings. We had the 60s sexual revolution, and now people are dying of AIDS."

• Hmm, you people are sounding more like Glenn Beck everyday, like his "I'm going to connect french fries with the collapse of the free world" episode. He really said that. Look it up.
  

"You know, these are the kind of cheap, underhanded, un-manly tactics that we've come to expect from Obama's favorite Republican, Mike Castle [..] Mike, this is not a bake-off, get your man-pants on."

• Holy hell Christine, you could make he-man cry.

"God may choose to heal someone from cancer, yet that person still has a great deal of medical bills. The outstanding bills do not determine whether or not the patient has been healed by God."

"America is now a socialist economy. The definition of a socialist economy is when 50% or more your economy is dependent on the federal government."

"You can't masturbate without lust." / "I'm a young woman in my thirties and I remain chaste."

• Oh, so that's why you became a witch.

"American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains."

• They would have made nice pets, but they've all died because upon being introduced to Jersey Shore, their brains instantly deflated like balloons.
  

"You know what, evolution is a myth." / "Why aren't monkeys still evolving into humans?"

• You want proof?

The 13 Best Political Parodies Of The 2010 Midterm Elections (VIDEO)

Top 5 Basketball Courts in Doha, Qatar

Keeping Fear Alive: 14 People & Things Doing Their Part (PHOTOS)

Five Terrifying New Horror Movies You Dare Not See

Crazed Violent Stick Figures (PHOTOS)

The 15 Greatest 'South Park' Movie Parodies (VIDEOS)

"During the primary, I heard the audible voice of God. He said, 'Credibility.'"

• Are you sure God didn't say "Sensibility"? Particularly your lack thereof.
  

"Absolutely, but let me qualify that -- I consider myself an authentic feminist. Not as defined by the modern movement. And, let me clarify that a little bit more. I was an English major, so break it down: -ist means one who celebrates. As a feminist, I celebrate my femininity."

After being asked if she considered herself a feminist, O'Donnell from (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/the_top_ten_christine_odonnell_quotes.php)

• So a dentist celebrates dents? And ageists celebrate age? I'm pretty sure that's not the case. Also, from wikipedia "Feminism refers to movements aimed at establishing and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women." I would add equal political, economic and social rights for everyone regardless of gender. It's not just a movement for women.
  

"This is a matter of culpability. What freak dancing is isn't just like the safety of mosh pitting, this is sexually explicit activity for minors. We do limit the expression of minors. There are drinking laws. There are -- you know, you have to be 18 to smoke. You can't go to school in a bikini. On one hand, you have people saying this is squelching their freedom, and then you scratch your head and say look over here, date rape is such an epidemic. There's a connection, and, if people realize that there's a connection, then they'll realize that these limitations and restrictions exist for a very valid reason."

>>The way she talks about AIDS on CSPAN should make you livid. Seriously.

>>Skip ahead to 2:50 to hear her deny the separation of church and state.

1st Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I can make fun of people like O'Donnell, but most of all it scares me. This country is inches away from being run by people who don't know the first thing about the constitution, the thing that they're supposedly using as a guiding principal. It is an imperfect living document, no doubt, but the separation of church and state is not something to be forgotten by anyone, let alone a person running for elected office.