June 17, 2008
It's Not Random If You Use Numbers
As they say in my homeland, "Howdy!"
The downtime has been lovely, but as part of the new workplan I'm going to be posting something short each and every day to keep the writing mojo flowing.
So, to kick things off, a veritable potpourri of interesting, thought-provoking, and wiinsome (sic) stuff. And, as the title indicates, it's not a random collection of stuff because it's numbered!
~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~
1) Wii now have a Nintendo Wii! Oui, c'est vrai. And we even have a few games for it that allow online play with other proud Wiiple. At present, we have MarioKart Wii, Endless Ocean, and Trauma Center: New Blood. So, if you've got a Wii, and one or more of those games, too, zing me an e-mail so wii can exchange super-secret and highly irritating Wii-codes, which will then allow us to enter those codes into our Wii systems thus unlocking online play on a game-by-game basis. (Yes, the process seems to be exactly that tedious.)
~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~
2) With all of the gay marriage going on in Massachusetts, and now in California and New York (though New York took the easy way out by recognizing gay marriages without performing them), I imagine straight, married people around the country must be reduced to quivering piles of lime-green jello as they await the inevitable dissolution of their own marriages. As we've been told time and again by the "marriage is a straights-only club" members, gay marriage is the final straw that will break the (straight) marriage camel's back. And now, via AmericaBlog, we have proof:
~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~
3) Somebody, somewhere, posted a link to this Talking Jesus Doll (I kid you not), and I haven't been able to get the darn thing out of mind for days now.
It's not that I'm particularly religious... I'm not. I just think Talking Jesus is kinda hot. I really appreciate it when "toy" companies put in the time and energy it takes to make Talking Jesus an attractive Caucasian guy with flawless hair and a reassuringly upper Midwestern newscaster accent (i.e., the accent most Americans can't hear as an accent).
~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~ < * > ~
4) While I was poking around, looking for the original link to Talking Jesus, I found this on BoingBoing, a link to t-shirt designs refuting one of the primary arguments of Creationism/So-Called "Intelligent" Design"
See, the Creationists argue that you don't have to teach Creationism, per se in science classes, just teach "the controversy" over evolution, which would require teaching Creationism and/or "Intelligent" Design. Of course, among scientists there really is no controversy. Evolution is accepted as the paradigm for the appearance and development of life on earth. And yet they try to weasel religion in any way they can. (Goodness, this is becoming quite the theological post, isn't it?)
I bring this up in part because I like the shirt designs, and partly because I have an editorial cartoon on my office door that makes the same points with astrology, alchemy, phrenology, and other pseudo-sciences. But these are wearable. Cool.
Posted by reparent at 6:43 PM | Comments (1)
December 4, 2007
The F-Word Strikes Again!
A family member recently sent me one of those presumably humorous e-mails that gets sent around the world billions of times before fading into obscurity... until it gets sent around the world billions of times 6-8 months later. This one was a collection of take-offs on the "Demotivators" posters, which are themselves satires of those ubiquitous motivational posters with an artistically-composed nature image and some platitudes about how "you can do it!"
These posters are rather more targeted, and much more profane, than the Demotivators. Some of them were amusing. As a procrastinator myself, I particularly liked this one:
And this one speaks to the math-challenged everywhere:
But then I came across this one, and I wasn't amused:
And this came from a family member who isn't homophobic or otherwise hostile to gays in the least. I'm guessing s/he didn't even really notice it. I mean, of course, calling something gay just means it's lame, right? Yes, we've already covered this topic. But it's not going away.
In fact, Details Magazine just made "faggot" the number 9 item on it's 2007 Power List. They explain who and what makes their list:
There are no white-haired moguls or bank chairmen on the Details Power 50, no one who holds court in Davos or at David Geffen’s beach house. Because, as anyone who understands power knows, it isn’t about corner offices and cocktail-party invitations—it’s about the space in your head. And the men who have it are the ones who control your viewing patterns, your buying habits, your anxieties, your lust—the things you think about. So on this list, Silicon Valley overlords rub shoulders with Father of the Year Kevin Federline, preachers consort with pornographers, and those fresh-scrubbed, inescapable kids from High School Musical 2 walk the halls with the new wave of school shooters. These are the people who have taken over the space in your head—whether you like it or not.
Lovely. So, we wend our way down the list to number 9, and we reach "The Other F-word." Its age is "Forever young." Even lovelier. Here's what Details has to say:
If you take a look back, it appears that 2007 was the year of the F-word—but not the one you’re thinking of. America’s rent-a-quote harridan of hatred, Ann Coulter, used the word to slag presidential candidate John Edwards. Presidential candidate Bill Richardson used the Spanish version (maricón) to slam a guy on the Don Imus radio show. Controversy exploded after Isaiah Washington allegedly dropped the F-bomb on a fellow cast member of Grey’s Anatomy. It’s a word that anyone who ever spent time in an American school yard is familiar with: faggot. But some bullies grow up, get famous, and keep on using it. “I hate gay people,” blurted former basketball star Tim Hardaway. Tucker Carlson bragged about having given a dude who tried to tap toes with him in a men’s room a taste of his bow-tied brutality (“I . . . hit him against the stall with his head, actually”). Hmmm. The word faggot, it seems, is on the tips of a lot of men’s tongues. They can’t stop thinking about it. Without it they’d be lost, and that makes you wonder who really has the power.
I applaud Details for realizing that the right-wing obsession with gay sex reveals... something about these folks. But the casual homophobia on display in a humorous de-motivational poster like the "Popped Collar" one above is a sign of continuing and deep-running problems. For both the straights and the gays.
We all have a lot of work ahead of us.
Posted by reparent at 6:27 PM | Comments (1)
November 13, 2007
Why Don't They Listen to Me?!
I teach classes on digital composition, narrative, textuality, and culture. And in all of these classes, I invariably end up discussing with my students the delights and dangers of the now-textualized and digitally-immortalized world of digital communication.
That is, I tell them that drinking-and-e-mailing can come back to bite you on the butt. And not just at your Senate confirmation hearing or Department of Justice scandal investigation! Posting to your blog or MySpace or Facebook page can actually have an impact on your job interviews. Or your job performance evaluations...
Anywhoooo... meet Kevin Colvin:
Kevin is (was?) an intern at the North American division of the Anglo Irish Bank.
Kevin sent this e-mail to his boss:
I just wanted to let you know that I will not be able to come into work tomorrow. Something came up at home and I had to go to New York this morning for the next couple of days. I apologize for the delayed notice.
And then Kevin's boss had the smart idea to check Kevin's Facebook page. The fabulous picture above is what Kevin found... Valleywag explains it thusly: "freshly posted to Facebook from the Halloween party Colvin apparently missed work to attend."
Kevin's boss replied to Kevin's excuse e-mail thusly: "Thanks for letting us know -- hope everything is okay New York. (cool wand)" and attached the photo... and sent the reply to everyone in the North American branch of the bank.
And now Joe.My.God. and Valleywag and Australia's News.Com.Au and this blog and everyone else in the blogoverse is talking about Kevin and his cool wand and his fabulous glitter eye makeup.
And still, my students roll their eyes when I tell them to be careful about what they post online or IM or e-mail...
Posted by reparent at 7:17 PM | Comments (0)
November 11, 2007
Ask Digital Digressions!
Once again, it's time for ASK DIGITAL DIGRESSIONS, the blog post inspired by your deepest desires (for... you know, information... about this... blog...).
Q: Hey, DD, what's up with the one-pants-leg-cuffed look you're sporting on the Author Photo? Signed, Confused in Cuff-Land
DD Responds: I'm glad you asked that, CiCL. The photo in question was taken by The Spouse during our recent trek to Bonny Old Scotland. While bicycling around the Island of Shapinsay in the Orkneys (which is where an important part of Frankenstein takes place), we stopped to enjoy the North Atlantic and take some pictures. This photo was one of the resulting photo-documents. My pants leg is cuffed to prevent my jeans from catching in the bicycle's chain. Since the chain is only on one side of the bicycle, I only need to cuff one leg to avoid getting mangled by a tragic pants-tastrophe. (Besides, that's one dang sexy calf muscle right there!) So now you know.
Q: I noticed you just added a new category to the blog, "Queer Theories." Obviously, that's a sign that the blog is going to be addressing more queer issues in the future. So... what's the best LGBT blog out there? Signed, Asking For No Particular Reason
DD Responds: Wow, AfNPR. That's a toughie. Personally, I read Center of Gravitas, Scott-O-Rama, Someone in a Tree, and Bloggernista (who I think I new once, far away, and in a not-so-happy long ago time. But I always, always check Joe.My.God. And so should you. Not only is Joe's blog consistently entertaining, it's also profound:
Best, most multi-faceted use of the phrase "We found ourselves on the dance floor" evah.
Q: Which school would win in a steel cage death-match: Ohio State or the University of Virginia? Signed, Betting on the Big 10
DD Responds: And is that your final answer BotB10? I'm sorry, but you lose. A recent study by Ohio State researchers Ohio State sociologist Dana Haynie, and her indentured servant graduate student, Stacy Armour, argued that:
youngsters who lose their virginity earlier than their peers are more likely to become juvenile delinquents. So obvious and well established was the contribution of early sex to later delinquency that the idea was already part of the required curriculum for federal "abstinence only" programs.
Except that they're wrong. Now, researchers at UVA (led by Paige Harden, a doctoral candidate in psychology -- go doctoral candidates!) have shown that "youngsters who have consensual sex in their early-teen or even preteen years are, if anything, less likely to engage in delinquent behavior later on."
Read the whole article for the details on the scientific smack-down. It's juicy behavioral genetics goodness. And it shows that the Cavaliers kick Buckeye butt.
Q: What the heck's up with the nom-de-blogs on this blog? Signed, Coeurlion
DD Responds: I'm glad you asked that, Coeurlion! This blog holds fast to a strict policy of respecting our commenters' (yes, both of you) identities. That means not letting the LOLCat out of the bag, as it were. And, just for the record, this blogger prefers "Chard" as a nom-de-blog, which, however, this blog and its blogger refuses to use.
Q: What's the best show on YouTube? Signed, Wretched 'cuz of the Writer's Strike
DD Responds: Obviously, that would be The Flight of the Conchords, originally airing on HBO, and then running in a much better format on YouTube. Check out:
Or this favorite of The Spouse:
Just watch them all. It's better than what you'll see on TV these days.
Thanks for tuning into another installment of Ask Digital Digressions!
Posted by reparent at 4:40 PM | Comments (1)
November 9, 2007
Is That Really Gay?
Tonight's should-be-out-partying-but-instead-I'm-blogging-so-you-don't-have-to blog post is about two recent big gay events: this week's South Park episode, and J.K. Rowling's announcement that Hogwarts Headmaster Albus Dumbledore was actually a big sissy all along.
Let's start with South Park. It's been a while since Trey Parker and Matt Stone really had anything worthwhile to say with their little animated show. Yes, I know "Make Love Not Warcraft" won an Emmy. But the show was middling at best, and the day a subversive, satirical show accepts an Emmy Award is the day it officially announces that it is over.
Woody Hearn's GU Comics does a great job of pointing out the jumped-the-sharkness of yet another South Park episode attempting to skewer a popular video game:
And so we watched this week's episode: "Guitar Queer-o," an oh-so-clever rhyming slam on the popular guitar-simulator game Guitar Hero (and its sequels, Guitar Hero 2 and Guitar Hero 3 -- original, no?). The plot is simple: Stan and Kyle become really good at the game, fame drives them apart, and eventually they reunite to grasp the Holy Grail (allegedly) of Guitar Hero accomplishment: scoring 1,000,000 points in Expert Mode. Which they do in the thrilling conclusion. The game responds not with it's usual "YOU'RE A ROCK STAR!" but with this message:
"CONGRATULATIONS! YOU ARE FAGS!"
I'm going to be generous here and try to interpret what I think Parker and Stone meant by this. The kids today say things are "so gay!" when they mean that things are "so bad!" Therefore, we could translate the end-game message into something along the lines of: "CONGRATULATIONS! SCORING THIS MANY POINTS PROVES YOU HAVE NO LIVES! WINNING SHOWS THAT YOU'RE COMPLETE LOSERS!" Ha-ha. We've never heard that before. And we didn't see the exact same point with the "Warcraft" episode... oh wait. We did.
But please. "You are fags"?
Obviously Parker and Stone are just phoning it in these days. But the rest of the (straight) world sees no problem with this. See here and here and here and here and jeez... it just goes on and on.
This makes me so angry I want to blast someone with a killing curse.
Which reminds me, J.K. Rowling now tells us that Dumbledore was a Friend of Dorothy, as they say. I'd drop a link, but it's Friday, and you've already heard this a billion times.
I've been having interesting discussions with a good friend who is incensed that Rowling would do this. Not because she has a problem with gay literary (or real) characters/people, but because once a book is written, it shouldn't change, she says.
The Promiscuous Reader points our attention to an article in The Dallas Morning News:
Is Dumbledore gay? He is for you, apparently. But unless you said it in the actual books, must he be so for me? Your saying so now makes it harder for me to imagine anything different. Do you really want to limit your fictional world that way? …
For all of those years, until your books were published, the characters and settings were yours to command and control. But then you let them go.
And speaking for all of your happy readers I need to tell you: Now they are ours.
Which leads Promiscuous Reader to conclude that:
“Ours” evidently means “heterosexuals” here – it doesn’t occur to the writer that many of Rowlings’s happy readers are also gay, with opinions of their own on this subject. On Jeffrey Weiss’s planet, a gay character is somehow “limited” – can you imagine him making the same complaint about a heterosexual character?
Now, given my recent conversations with my friend, I'm a little more willing to cut Jeffrey Weiss a little slack. Of course, I grew up in Dallas reading the DMN, and the particularly tone-deaf writings in it are all too familiar to me. Maybe Weiss didn't mean that "we" are the straight majority who now own Rowling's imaginary characters, but it sure as hell sounds that way.
But hey, that's not the worst part. The ever-readable Gay Prof puts the fine point on what's going on here in Rowling-land, and it really doesn't have anything to do with the homophobic reactions of her readers. It has to do with what Rowling did and didn't do:
Now I don’t mean to sound ungrateful, but a gay Dumbledore is not much of an improvement on the same old queer images that we have seen elsewhere in the popular media. Rowling’s outing of Dumbledore hardly destroyed the closet around the fictional character. On the contrary, she only pointed out how tightly those closet doors were sealed.
And that's the real point here. It doesn't matter what Rowling says now. Authors frequently re-visit their creations, sometimes in print (every sequel ever written), sometimes on the stage (Falstaff was dead until audience demand forced Shakespeare to bring him back to life in The Merry Wives of Windsor), and sometimes in conversation, as with Dame Rowling.
Because the real problem here is that the only explicitly (now) gay character in the entire Potterverse was so deeply closeted (and arguably asexual) that only his author could detect it. That's not good for gays. That's not good for understanding.
If I were a different person, I'd call it so gay, but I'm not that person.
It's so straight. And I'm sick and fucking tired of it all.
Posted by reparent at 7:08 PM | Comments (1)