re: Coincidence? on TV

I watch quite a bit of TV. Good and bad, male and female oriented, above and below my intelligence level; I could say that you can't comment on pop culture without experiencing it but that would be only half true.

So I have a couple of questions for TV but go easy on me because I'm exposing my bad habits here. Here's the first edition:

Why can I always call who is going to sleep with whom based almost solely on race? A black woman makes a cameo on a connected show with only one black male = SEXUAL TENSION.

And why do women who are pains in the ass need to be brought down to earth by sex and can only be good at their jobs or relationships and not both? I actually think this is often true, but of both sexes.

Fuck You Private Practice.

Do you have questions for TV? Send them to me c/o TV and I'll make sure it gets them.

UPDATE: here is another question: Why was Tracie Thom on PP? BITCH WAS IN RENT.

re: no girls on the internet and the Georgetown PA

Here's a couple of posts: the sexism of the internet and on that Georgetown kid who hired a personal assistant.

No girls allowed?

Jerk or Genius: student hires PA.

re: Lady Gaga is the worst

Update to my opinion on how useless Lady Gaga is (except at making people talk about Lady Gaga):"

Lady Gaga speaks like an "intelligent" "person" - which makes everything she says more terrible. She is going to take opera mainstream! The Monster's Ball! Wow! NO. It will be terrible.

Let's just say that in the world of making esoteric or overshadowed arts popular, she is not So You Think You Can Dance, she is Dancing with the Stars.

re: 2010 medals and payphones: cultural significance!

New posts from MagMe:

Pay phones: a symbol of our cultural bias.

2010 Medals: finally, something Vancouver be proud of.

re: Dragonette, Matt Good, Cyborgs and Robots who...love?

Hey HEY hey....

Here are some new posts on MagMe:

Cyborgs are the future...and the future is now.

Matt Good's Vancouver - a review.

Do not listen to Lady Gaga. Do listen to Dragonette.

re: discriminating against white males or don't think we are so different

This is frustrating, but I'm not going to indulge in the "American's are so racist and teribbler-er than us (Canada)" because we have our own deep-seated, perhaps more passive nowadays but no less historically blood soaked, intolerances. Watch this and cringe and yet, hope:



I think it's silly to use the fact that Sotomayor called herself an "affirmative action baby" - she's saying that to show the good of affirmative action, not apologizing for herself.

This is like saying it's discriminating to have a First Nations, African, Women's Centre or LGBT Centre (like we have at my University) but not a Men's Centre. Until the freaking globe isn't a Men's Centre, they are creating a safe and empowered place for groups who have traditionally been given neither safety nor power.

And "evil affirmative action" is the most ridiculous phrase I've ever heard. I don't even think Pat Buchanan is evil. Don't be throwing that word around so much, people.

Kudos to Maddow for giving him his say and then straight up saying he's "wrong," "dated" and "privileging race" i.e. is being racist. Shutting down opinons is not the way, but rather responding to them intelligently, calmly and with BALLS (ok, so technically she has none but you get my drift).

I've had it with Conservative Republican loudmouths - let's get intelligent debate going on here (on both sides of the border). They don't know how their own system works (see Glen Beck), cannot maintain a rational,cohesive argument (see Bill O'Reilly), are outright terrible people (see Ann Coulter, who even makes Bill O. look reasonable and may be closer to the E word than I've ever encountered) or all of the above (see all of the above).

UPDATE: Dr. Stephen T. Colbert discusses "reverse racism" and "reverse civil rights leader Pat Buchanan." LOLWHIMPER.

To counter the utter terror and frustration that is fighting to dominate my opinon of North American politics, here is the cutest thing ever:




I'm not tickilish but I understand how this would rock.

re: don't go to Michael Bay movies or why there is no such thing as an "ironic dollar"

If you feel the need laugh and then cry and then curl into a ball of fear and loathing, read the Storyboards from Michael Bay's The Great Gatsby.



Ok, breathe, it's a joke.

But this is why I won't see Transformers 2. (And why I need to take a firmer stance on what movies I'll pay to see or even see with someone else's dollar.) Because this boat (the boat in this instance being Michael Bay's creative process) is probably real. And there is too much crap and not enough good in popular film, or popular anything, to let this stuff slide.

Let's be clear: no matter how many times you say you like something ironically or "because it's bad", your money is not an ironic colour of green. Nobody deposits your intentions.

Your money simply says "this is an acceptable way to approach 'art' and we can continue to do so and profit." (You can expand that to any area of commerce really, but I don't want to get too too pedantic.)


So if you want to go to a movie because you will be entertained, fine and good. But don't qualify it - you are paying for a good and consuming it, end of story. As long as people consume a good it will most likely continue to be produced. THAT'S MONEY SCIENCE.

So, in conclusion,

re: Michael Jackson

I am not sad (nor happy) that Michael Jackson is dead.
And while he was quite the character and deserved respect, not really taking a moment for Mr. McMahon.
OK, I took (a little) pause at the news of David Carradine, but let's be honest, that's because of my personal interest in him making more movies for me to watch.

It's not that it's not sad at all...it's just that I am not feeling any actual sadness.

I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THESE PEOPLE.

Okay, so anyone dying is sad and blah blah but we don't care about people dying anywhere else in the world (not enough here even) so why do people care about these guys enough to statweet about them?

Also, I am fully aware of my hypocrisy - I am commenting on it right now and I don't sponsor any African children and I don't give out soup so yes, I'm a jerk.

But can we just get a handle on ourselves please?

I don't call myself a blogger so I don't have to comment to keep up with my peers, but the Internet, man - gotta keep up with the webJoneses.

re: self awareness test or why do you watch the UFC?

If you speak to me irl (that's in real life for people who speak properly), you know that I have certain...feelings...dismissive ones...vaguely disgusted ones...about the UFC. Don't get me wrong, these are athletic, tough, determined fighters who have trained and fought their way to success in their field. But blood sports are just not my thing and I don't get them - cannot our gladitorial instinct be purged with just normal sports? (If not there is no reason for those either really.)

But besides not being a sports girl in general, and besides not being a blood sports girl especially, I don't watch the UFC because it makes me feel all tingly in a way I don't understand. Haha, just kidding that's the only reason TO watch it. And that is the self awareness test, cuz if you don't at least get the irony of this sport then...well I don't know. The majority (not all but most) of those who watch this sport are some of the most heteronormative (at least) and homophobic (at medium) people who you'll observe*: Coincidence?

* I'd say meet but I'll admit that I'm rarely if never inclined to talk to these sorts and so my research is mostly watching them be total assholes.

But to lighten things up a bit:





If you have any more thoughts or comic gems in regards to this feel free to let us all know in the comments.

re: no one should watch the Watchmen

I finally saw Watchmen. So yes this is outdated and irrelevant.

But I was told to share this.
Here is an actual (approx) phone conversation I just had with Ms.Z

Me: So we saw Watchmen instead. It was awful. Just terrible.

Z: I liked it.

Me: No. No, you didn't.

Z: I mean I liked see the graphic novel come to life, the special effects, I liked that part of it.

Me: Well that's not liking it, that's liking the effects. I mean, I liked that too. But that doesn't make it a good movie. Like, as a whole object.

[Sputtering]The soundtrack alone was the most hamfisted, poorly conceived thing I've ever experienced. If the movie was good, I mean, it wasn't but even if it was, the soundtrack alone would have ruined it. Zack Snyder needs to do more than suck the creativity out of middling pieces of art and vomit it onto the screen. That would be good for him to stop.

Z: You should be paid to rant.

[Zofia's actual thought: You should be paid to rant about things that are completely irrelevant and help nobody by existing or being ranted about. which I would do. gladly. call me.]

Scene.

re: a new year (or close enough)

Hello again to all my friends,
I'm glad you came to play.

I'm back.
My goal is to do one a week min, guys.
ONE A WEEK.

You know what would be awesome? Well, I'll tell you then.

Send me a reccomendation for a book, album, movie to review.
Old, new, terrible, amazing, send me a reccomendation (better yet the objet d'art itself) and I'll review it (honestly and without bias). It'll be fun, I'll build some content and you can feel rest assured that you are not the only one appreciating, hating or apprecihating (TM.) le objet.

Also, to be started soon - irrelevant reviews. Reviews of the old (new is overrated you guys). I have a whole book and cd library of stuff I bought years ago but haven't perused in a while or at all.

So I'll be pulling out old faves and never haves and will add their importance to the blogosphere.

Are you excited? Well, you should be.

re: not doing it to the max

And I mean that in terms of this blog, and emotionally.

I still want to get to some of it but here is a little update - going back to school, still writing for a cmns dept. and....um....this comic: Yup, welcome back to Communication Maegan: prepare for 1st years telling you what you already now. Pedantry now!

re: casual sex (i know! harlot!)

This one is for the ladies. Stereotypically, men don't have a problem with casual sex. Or, rather, it isn't demanded of them that they do. But I know a number men that have qualms with casual sex. So maybe this is for the gents too.

Anyway, those who know me know I love the boys (the all grown kind) and if ever asked to justify my nature I'm confident enough as a women to admit it. I adore men. I like Sex.

I know! HARLOT!

So when I came across this picture and article, I had to rave a bit about it, and rant a bit about the bad rep casual sex still gets (no matter how much it sells).

For the record: casual sex is not by definition self-disrespect or avoidance of commitment. It is merely sex.

Whether satisfying a physical need or a psychological one, you can have healthy intimacy outside of a relationship. I would love a full three course meal of passion, love AND commitment but hell if I'm going to starve while I wait for it. Besides, sometimes all you want is the appetizer.

But without commitment does not mean without self awareness. Both parties must be aware of the situation, especially if you are in a "friends with benefits" situation. And if you are in love with that person, casual is impossible. Utterly, completely, irrevocably.

In the end, what we have to consider is motivation. Healthy sex can happen outside a relationship. Yes, sex is better with trust and intimacy and *gasp* that can happen outside a committed relationship also. Consider your motivation, consider your partner's. Consider the consequences.

Consider a colour coded chart - having friends (with benefits) who are friends of friends (with benefits) leads only to French bedroom farce. Trust me.

re: douchebags, a compedium of species

perhaps one of the best things ever, written on one of the worst things ever (in a never really been exposed to anything really terrible sense):

I present a compendium of Douchebag, an ubiquitous urban genus:

Etymology

Genus: Douchebag - a zoological study

Genus: Douchebag, Species: The Deep V

c/o RadarOnline

re: white whale records or a "trifecta of 'eh, it's okay'"

I was just reading in the Georgia Straight that White Whale Records is officially out of here and off to Ontario (but we already knew that: "The Lodge" packs up house") - well the Octoberman frontman and Havdale are going so, defacto, the label is going.

Man, locals love these guys...am I crazy? Well, yeah, but about this? They are talented musicians but they just don't have that oomph that brings them from just nice. No "wow factor" as my hero Tim Gunn would say.

I'm not going to let popular opinion sway me, but I'm getting the impression that it might just be me (or bribes are involved).

Havdale's Kids These Days is awesome though - I have a soft spot for pop rock - and their last show - in Vancouver or ever - is this week at the Railway on Club.

Maybe in the piece below I should have added that I loved KTD, it might have softened the bitchiness of me. But what fun would that be?

Local label makes good (but not great)

Here are some musings on three releases from local label White Whale Records, both run by and representing Ryder Havdale. He’s so going to delete me from facebook.

Octoberman Run from Safety

What hits you first when Run from Safety starts spinning is the Bob Dylan-esque vocals on the track “By the Wayside”. This initial promise remains unfulfilled though – except for a bit of nice bit of brass, the album is uninspiring. It’s like blogger poetry, or worse, poetry about blogger poetry. I’m assuming they were purposefully mixing their (clichéd) metaphors, but nothing is pushed far enough to be witty or satirical.

Octoberman’s music and lyrics constantly miss opportunities to be more than coffee house open mic rock (some tracks like “No Qualms” are pure coffee house) and it’s disappointing because the potential is there. I’m usually pretty harsh when it comes to lyric writing. But in the folk genre (maybe we’re at neo-folk?), lyrics are paramount. Lines like “love is top drawer, like an old pair of socks…now I’m feeling so bad, because my socks are torn” could be campy fun if it wasn’t so earnest. “Once in a Blue” has some interesting phrasing, but its plea to “think for yourself” is not only clichéd but tedious.

In short: not terrible, but I’m glad it was free.

Culture Reject Culture Reject

Culture Reject is an odd dish. It smells delicious, but doesn’t taste as good. Or maybe it doesn’t appear appetizing but tastes better…Whatever the food based analogy, this disc is a real stew. A little folk, a Rasta and a little Jack Johnson rip-off over a coffee shop in Havana/piano jazz background. Plus, a lot of handclaps - maybe too many. I know, I didn’t think it was possible either.

It's not all bad. The first track, intro “Ain’t It on the Floor,” has you grooving summer drive style (though maybe in an early 2000s Vibe commercial style), and “Blueprint” has intriguing vocals.

“Inside the Cinema” represents both my ambivalence about this album. While I’m always a sucker for the xylophone, brass and handclaps and sarcastic (I hope) lines like “Who fucking loves New York, who is the greatest fan?", these tidbits are undermined by lines like “gunna get home, gunna get stoned, make myself food, make myself good” and an almost schizophrenic orchestration.

So, I would suggest you at least check this out. It may be addicting or just annoying. Unfortunately for me, I think it may be both. It’s not really enough substance for me but hey, sometimes you just wanna make yourself food, make yourself good.

The Mohawk Lodge Wildfires

The Mohawk Lodge is led and for the most part constituted by White Whale Records head Ryder Havdale. I’ve written on them before for a piece on Music Waste so I won’t speak at length about them. But, I thought I’d give them another shot now that I’ve taken a swipe at the full version of Wildfire. Besides, good things come in threes. Or things do anyway.

“The Lodge” has been compared to many bands and artists I like, like Bruce Springsteen (whatever guys, he’s The Boss) or The Handsome Furs, but it completes this trifecta of “eh, it’s okay” by not really blowing me away. Again, it’s something to check out but do it on the internet box. You will also find many reviews that love all these artists, so maybe I’m just crazy (hint: I’m not).

Now, I’m going to acknowledge a bias on my part: Ryder Havdale was a disappointing interview – he didn’t leave me overly open to be generous about his efforts. However, the output I’ve heard from other WWR artists is not helping me get over my first impressions. That being said, I’m all about making good in your home town, especially if it’s making something from nothing. You’ll have to decide whether respecting an artist is the same as liking their work. (Hint: it’s not).

published (but not as awesome) version

re: the peak

if you notice that things I write for the illustrious SFU student newspaper The Peak are a little different from my personal work, well, good call.

I've discovered that writing for an audience often actually means writing for what your editor thinks the audience is. according to the Peak this means business students. hells if I know why, but there you go. and according to the Peak, business students are not interested in things like "allusion," "poetic phrasing" or "cleverness." ok, they didn't say that last part, but the keeping it simple for business students is all true.

I also blame the CUP, but as they won't return my phone calls it's pretty fruitless. just kidding. nobody calls the CUP.