Archive for August, 2010

What not to wear

Posted: August 16, 2010 in Uncategorized

First, my apologies for the picture that you see to the left. As gruesome as it is, I felt it necessary to post this picture with this post for illustrative purposes. I can complain about the fashion choices of others until the cows come home (moo), but unless you actually see what is now burned into my skull, my words are empty and hollow…like the Tin Man’s penis. I digress…
Before we get to dissect the aforementioned picture, let me first give you the set-up. I took this photo at an outdoor concert in Council Bluffs, IA. It was, as one can imagine for August, a bit warm, though it was not as sweltering has it has been around these (Midwest) parts over the last couple of weeks. Because the temperature was above 80-degrees, much of the whiskey tango present at this show decided it would be a good idea to wear as little clothing as possible, regardless of what one looks like in said clothing (or lack thereof). Furthermore, the heat apparently clouded the judgment of many a person at the show, and thus we are discussing the nauseating fashion choices of those that attended this event.
I call the photo to the left, “Baking the Bread.” In this photographic masterpiece, I ask you to notice a couple of things. First, the obvious loaf of bread wrapped around this poor soul’s waist. Now, before you crucify me here, let me add one thing. I know that nobody is perfect and I by no means believe every person on the planet is built like a super model. However, with that being said, if your body is in a condition that is questionable at best, it is my opinion that you should leave the shirt on…more on that in a minute. Back on point we go…
The next think I would ask you to notice about this photo is her shorts. These shorts, which look to be an abomination of anything decent, appear to have given up on attempting to contain the loaf of bread spilling forth from this gal’s gut. Not only are the shorts unbuttoned, presumably because the button flew off and killed a small child, but they are folded down. Not discretely folded down either. Oh no. Full blown, laundry-style folding. Classy is the word that comes to mind when I see these shorts.
The last thing I’d like you to notice about “Baking the Bread” is the tattoo, just below what I assume are boobs. It looks like it is some sort of writing, and while I do not know what it says, my guess is that it is the recipe to the loaf of bread we will all be enjoying here shortly. DING! Bread’s ready!
As I just mentioned, I know we are not perfect. We all have our physical flaws and some of us are just a bit more conscious about covering up said flaws. With that in mind, I just have one question for the bread lady: who the holy fuck told you it was a good idea to leave the house wearing that outfit? I know it’s summer. I know it’s hot. I get that. But, really, come the fuck on. There is nothing about that outfit that screams sexy. The only thing I see when I look at that picture, besides a loaf of bread, is vomit—in my future and all over my keyboard. What makes this even worse is that this young lady was with a guy (not pictured) who was, based on their, um, behavior, apparently her love interest in some way. How did this guy keep his mouth shut and enable this chick?
If I were with someone and they wanted to bust out that particular brand of whiskey tango at a concert, let me tell you how that conversation would go:
Girl: How does this look?
Me: Are you fucking kidding? Where’s my butter?
Girl: *cry*
Me: Here is some tissue. And a hoodie. And a mirror for next time.
Guys, sometimes you have to speak up and tell your chick that if she wears that out in public, otherwise people like me are going to have a field day making fun of her. Sure, I might burn in hell for doing so, but I’ll be laughing all the way there. And girls, the same thing applies to you too. If your guy looks like Jabba the Hutt, do us all a favor and tell him to put his shirt on. Or a poncho. Or something to cover up sweaty bacon back.
Outdoor events always bring out the worst in people. Although I may be utterly disgusted by this, I can’t help but be thankful because, well, it gives me something to muse about.
Oh I feel so delightfully white trash. Mommy, I want a mullet.
–Stewie Griffin

I now prounounce you…

Posted: August 5, 2010 in Uncategorized

Gay “marriage” is a hot topic these days and has been for quite some time. Recently, a judge in California overturned a resolution by the voters that banned gay “marriage.” While it is certainly not the end of the fight, it is definitely an interesting development in a long and contentious battle between the two sides.

As you all know, I am a liberal and, frankly, I make no bones about it. However, as many of you may also know, I was raised as a conservative and spent a great deal of my life clinging to conservative values that I thought were “right.” With those facts in mind (especially the “liberal” part), I have to state my opinion on gay “marriage.”

Many of us, regardless of political affiliation or ideology, have no problem with two people getting together and giving a long-term commitment to one another, regardless of their genders. What seems to ruffle everyone’s feathers, however, is use of the word “marriage” when it comes to the ceremonious (and legal) union of two people of the same gender. It would appear to me, through the art of keen observation, that the word “marriage” is the thorny issue that gets dug into everyone’s side. You don’t see people getting up in arms about states allowing same-sex couples to qualify for benefits or other perks that married people are privy to. It is only when the word “marriage” is introduced that conservatives (mainly) get on their soapboxes and begin to preach about blah blah blah.

In an effort to put this issue to bed once and for all and let everyone move on with their lives, let’s examine the word marriage. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, “marriage” is defined as, “the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law.” This word has been around since the 14th century and has had, one would assume, the exact same meaning through the duration of its existence, until recently of course. Going with the original definition, we see that “marriage” is, simply put, a ceremony between members of the opposite sex. Sounds easy enough, right? People tend to go off the pure definition of things and when someone tries to change that definition in order to match their view of the subject, it has a tendency to alienate others. Not to mention the fact that most religions out there don’t support gay “marriage”, which in turn taints the religious aspect of a wedding in some regard. Understanding this fact, and before your panties in a bunch thinking I’m going to rail against why gays should be allowed to walk down the path of divorce like everyone else, I have a simple solution for the issue: don’t use the term “gay marriage.”

I know, that sounds totally crazy, right? Well, I personally don’t think it is too crazy. As we discussed previously, the human species tends to get a bit lazy when it comes to linguistics and/or coining new phrases (unless are for the Internet, LOL ROFL LMAO). Much like turkey bacon is not really bacon, gay marriage isn’t really marriage in the truest sense of the word. Therefore, it only stands to reason that, like turkey bacon, perhaps we should call gay marriage something else.

I know what you (gay) guys are thinking, “Civil union is just so b-o-r-i-n-g.” I couldn’t agree more, my fashionista friends. That is why I propose we change the term “gay marriage” to “rainbowfication.” It combines “rainbows,” which us straight people know you like, and “unification” which is legally what you are doing. Additionally, not only do you get a cool new word and ceremony that is all your own, it may actually find put to rest the constant bickering over stupid laws that, given the need for equality, should just be common sense.

If two people want to commit to spending their lives with one another, far be it from me to argue with it, even if that lifestyle isn’t for me. I have no moral opinions on the issue and I say if it makes people happy, let them do it. What I do take exception to, however, is using the word “marriage” to describe something that really isn’t a marriage at all, but rather a legally binding commitment ceremony. Let straight people have their “marriage” and gay people have their “rainbowfication.” Many gays pride themselves on being unique and outside the fold of mainstream society. By having their own ceremony, one that cannot be copied by the straighties, they are further cementing themselves as a unique part of our society. Finally, this means that straight folks can stop pitching a God-awful fit every time something like this comes up on the ballot and we can hopefully move on with breaking down more important barriers between hetero and homosexuals.

In reality, I know this will never happen. The gay rights movement will still insist on calling it marriage and the conservative movement will still insist on fighting this tooth and nail. This will, as a consequence, continue to eat up our tax dollars and dig an even deeper divide between the two parties. I guess this is just the way we do things in America.

Whenever the people are for gay marriage or medical marijuana or assisted suicide, suddenly the “will of the people” goes out the window.

–Bill Maher