Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Media’

Eat less “chikin”

Posted in Politics, Religion (or lack thereof), tagged , , , on July 23, 2012| 2 Comments »

Dear Dan Cathy:

I am impressed by your ability to lead Chick-fil-A, a business with 1,608 restaurants and sales of more than $4 billion last year. I’m also impressed that you publicly voice your beliefs, even if they are unpopular. (At least they seem to be unpopular in my social circle.)

You know you’ve chosen a tough road when even the Muppets hate you.

I fully support your ability as an American to support “the biblical definition of the family unit.” As I’ve mentioned before, I think people can support whatever they want in their church and private lives. But if we are talking about legislation, then we will have to agree to disagree.

“All men are created equal” to me means that all people should have the access to the same rights in the United States — paid for, of course, via tax dollars (that everyone pays regardless of, well, anything. Unless they have really good lawyers. Or lobbyists).

Truth be told, I haven’t eaten at one of your restaurants since 1994. That was when I bit into a filet sandwich and found an unsavory hunk of cartilage. Little did I know then that your beliefs were unsavory (to me) as well.

That little bit of gristle saved me from eventual guilt, though, at supporting an organization that does not support all people. Feel free to believe what you believe, support what you support. I’ll be over at Taco Bell, faux beef and all.

Exercising my right to choose,
Beth

Read Full Post »

A bit about a big booty call

Posted in Random, tagged , , , , , on July 14, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Dear Ashley Van Sipma:

I discovered your article about World’s Fattest Woman Pauline Potter via a link to a Huffington Post version of the story a friend posted on my Facebook wall. (Thanks Julia!)

I can’t imagine what you must have thought when your Closer (UK) editor assigned the story. Or maybe you found Potter on your own.

American journalists are supposed to try to avoid inserting bias by using words such as “shockingly” and “incredibly,” but really, I think you just put into words what we all were thinking.

I admire your restraint in not editorializing more, instead choosing to let Potter and her ex-husband Alex tell the tale I’m not sure we needed to know.

While I admire Potter’s attempts to lose weight by exercising, I’m not sure I needed to know that she does it through sex with Alex the Ex up to seven times a day. And I certainly didn’t need to know that “it’s great exercise just jiggling around.” And that he came sniffing around again when she had hit her largest weight of 728 pounds. (Does he have a little fetish?)

During the interview, what did you do when Alex said the following?

It’s hard to position her and find her pleasure spots as she has a lot of fat in the pelvic area. But it turns me on knowing she’s satisfied. Although once, when she got on top, I couldn’t breathe.

Did you just look down at the notepad and keep on writing, pretending this was the most normal interview ever? Or did you look up, eyes wide, shocked at your good luck at finding someone so quotable?

I mean, this is great news for Potter as she’s lost 98 pounds already. And they both seem very happy. But I just think that the quotes are so candid — graphic even — that it forces us as readers to gawk, gape and form lasting mental images.

But perhaps this frank reporting will be inspiring to others.

Anyway, good job on the article, and congrats on Huffington Post reworking it for the U.S. audience. Because of that, you earned an increase of about 2,800 percent in Facebook, Twitter and email shares.

Maybe you’ll get a raise, or at least diversified story options (read: ones that are not tabloid fodder).

Still Cloroxing my mind,
Beth

Read Full Post »

A snarky screed to Sorkin

Posted in Politics, Random, tagged , , , , on June 27, 2012| 6 Comments »

Dear Aaron Sorkin:

You’ve had an impressive and envy-inspiring career so far, writing hits such as “Moneyball,” “A Few Good Men,” “The West Wing” and “Sports Night” and winning accolades and awards.

So why so angry?

At 51 years old, you are much too young to turn into an Andy Rooney-style curmudgeon. I’ve read that your new show, “The Newsroom,” is yet another opportunity you’ve seized to Set the People Straight. I apologize: I haven’t seen it yet.

I share your concern about the state of journalism today, but you and I clearly differ as to whether the Internet is a good or bad thing. Here’s what you told the Atlantic Wire last year:

The upside of web-based journalism is that everybody gets a chance. The downside is that everybody gets a chance. I can’t really get on board with the demonization of credentials with phrases like “the media elite” (just like doctors, airline pilots and presidents, I prefer reporters and commentators to be elite) and the glamorization of inexperience with phrases like ‘citizen journalist.’ …As the saying goes, the problem with free speech is that you get what you pay for.

You are aware that journalists are not technically credentialed, right? There’s no test, no overseeing board, no gated membership area. Somebody just has to be willing to give you a job.

Before the Internet, opportunities were few. Cities were lucky to have one daily paper, one weekly paper, and a couple of television stations. There wasn’t too much turnover.

But now, thanks to the Internet, there are many Web-only publishers. And the great thing is that they are not under corporate control like the “elite media” to which you refer.

I don’t know if you can handle the truth, but the truth is that more voices means that we have a better handle on truth in general — if we as consumers are willing to read and listen to a variety of voices and do some critical thinking. Yes, whiffs of Chomsky right here.

But you have a problem with that:

One of the things I find troubling about the Internet, as great a resource tool as it is, and as nice as it is that we can all communicate with each other, and that everybody has a voice – the thing is, everybody’s voice oughtn’t be equal.

Oh Aaron. Such an elitist. It is ironic that the person who won an Oscar for writing “The Social Network” and is writing a biopic of Steve Jobs could feel this way.

You reserve special hatred for bloggers, even mistaking print reporters for a bloggers.

Ugh. I’m a blogger, Aaron. I also subscribe to numerous newspapers and magazines, watch TV, go to movies, read books (both print and electronic versions)*, and I have a Ph.D. (And I’m sticking out my tongue at you in a very educated and mature way.)

Look, Aaron, the Internet is not going away. So let’s trim those eyebrows and put away the shaking fist. Don’t you have work to do?

Stop biting the hand that feeds you,
Beth

* Although I am a little embarrassed about what I read last.

Read Full Post »

“Fifty Shades” of green

Posted in Random, tagged , , , on June 22, 2012| 2 Comments »

Dear EL James:

Congratulations on the success of the “Fifty Shades” trilogy! You’ve come a long way since writing fan fiction about Bella and Edward. Your meteoric rise to the top of the best sellers list is an inspiration to many writers.

With all the hoopla surrounding your work, you would think so-called “mommy porn” is something new. But romance novels have been around in some form since the 1700s. Bodice-rippers such as Fabio enjoyed a boom in the 1980s, so maybe this is just a second wave featuring short-haired, yoga-toned guys.

I know you are in the middle of a book tour, so I won’t keep you. I just want to ask a small favor: When writing your next book, please avoid overusing the following phrases that make “Fifty Shades” hard to bear:

  • “Mean machine” (a reference to the protagonist’s computer)
  • “Shades of … ” (fill in the blank)
  • “Lips quirk up”
  • “Bit her lip”
  • “Cocks his head to one side”
  • “Lips press into a line”
  • “Blazing grey eyes”
  • “Hooded eyes”
  • “Peeks up at him”
  • “Inner goddess”

Additionally, we readers are willing to suspend our disbelief, but “Fifty Shades” is really more than we can bear. (For example, after her lover buys her publishing house employer then beats and fires her boss, Ana is magically promoted — without lover’s intervention — from lowly assistant who gets coffee to the position of editor. After being on the job one week. Right.)

This is a perfect review on Amazon of the whole setup:

About half way through the book, I looked up the author to see if she was a teenager. I really did because the characters are out of a 16 year old’s fantasy. The main male character is a billionaire (not a millionaire but a billionaire) who speaks fluent French, is basically a concert level pianist, is a fully trained pilot, is athletic, drop dead gorgeous, tall, built perfectly with an enormous penis, and the best lover on the planet. In addition, he’s not only self made but is using his money to combat world hunger. Oh yeah, and all of this at the ripe old age of 26! And on top of that, he’s never working. Every second is spent having sex or texting and emailing the female character. His billions seem to have just come about by magic. It seriously feels like 2 teenage girls got together and decided to create their “dream man” and came up with Christian Grey.

It’s not a good sign when even the sex scenes get old. (An orgasm every time? Even from him just saying her name. Riiiight.)

But you know what? I forked over $29.99 for the trilogy, and I’m not alone. Clearly none of the above matters. I’m not going to be a hater — good for you! Now I know the bar is set low enough that I can write my own raunch and make some cash.

Soon-to-be sisters in spreader bar scrawls,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Amercia the Beautiful

Posted in Grammar, etc., Politics, tagged , , , , , , on June 15, 2012| 6 Comments »

Dear Mitt,

I don’t like you. I’m sorry, but there it is. It isn’t your politics, though I do think you are a heartless, moneygrubbing scumbag who hates immigrants and women. (Or maybe that’s just an illusion created by the so-called liberal media. And your staff. And wife.)

As I’ve mentioned in my blog, it makes me sad that Republicans had four years to come up with a good candidate and you turned out to be the best they can offer. And that’s after beating out gems such as Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

But in addition to all the other reasons I have not to like you, I have one more: You can’t spell.

Look, you can blame your staff, or lack thereof. I know you are searching for a copywriter. It doesn’t matter to me. You want to be in charge, so you have to take responsibility for every part of your campaign — especially when you want to make education a big part of your platform.

Just so you know, I’m not happy with Obama either. He’s had spelling errors too. But at least he doesn’t remind me of a used-car salesman. (And he treats his dog better.)

Able to spell and vote,
Beth

Read Full Post »

More beefcake? Yes, please.

Posted in Random, tagged , on June 9, 2012| 6 Comments »

Dear Joe Manganiello,

I owe you an apology. I’m so sorry that I didn’t notice you earlier. I guess I was preoccupied. But thanks to Entertainment Weekly‘s relentless coverage of “Magic Mike” and “True Blood,” I’m now paying attention. Close attention.

Hello, Joe!

I see from IMDb that you’ve been working for some time. Unfortunately for me, I don’t watch “One Tree Hill,” “How I Met Your Mother” and “True Blood.” Eddie is the “True Blood” fan in the family. “Who’s Eddie?” you ask. My husband. Yes, I’m married — married, but not dead. (He’s hot too, by the way. I have good taste.)

Anyway, thank you for spending countless hours at the gym to make yourself memorable. Thank you for constantly removing your shirt to show off the results of your hard work. And thank you for wearing leather and other supple fabrics. And crawling around in the woods.

Here’s to a new season of “True Blood” (starting tomorrow) and to the forthcoming “Magic Mike” (June 29). I’ll be paying attention from now on.

Love and kisses,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Moving day approaches: A letter to my dad

Posted in Politics, tagged , , , , , , , , , on May 14, 2012| 18 Comments »

Dear Dad,

I hope you and Katherine are doing well. Eddie and I are fine, except we are going to have to move. Now that President Obama is “leading a war on traditional marriage,” we are investigating other countries to inhabit. (I am so glad Rush Limbaugh pointed out Obama’s transgressions to us. You know we look to him for advice because of his four traditional marriages’ worth of experience.)

Unfortunately, developed countries such as Belgium, Canada, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands are out as they also support the abomination that is a union between two people who love each other. I mean two people who love each other who are also of the same gender, of course. The horror!

Like our friends in North Carolina, we certainly cannot condone that unnatural behavior. Leviticus 18:22 clearly states that someone cannot have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman. Despite the fact that appears to be good news for lesbians, we understand the intent.

I want you to know that Eddie and I also plan to abide by other passages of Leviticus. For example, we’re going to make sure we eat the leftover sacrifices on the first or second day. We had no idea that the sacrifices became impure on Day Three (Lev. 19:27). Eddie knows he can’t eat any of the offerings until he gets rid of that nasty Athlete’s foot (Lev. 22:4).

Also, I may have taken the Lord’s name in vain, so Eddie has told Shirtless George next door that he can gather a posse of fellow Shriners and stone me to death (Lev. 24:16). No one can prove that I did it, though, so I may be OK. We do plan to have a word with Mrs. Hope on Victory Drive, however. She clearly doesn’t realize that she is flirting with a stoning of her own (Lev. 20:27).

The good news is that we are going to have help moving because we can buy some people (Lev. 25:45). We also have plenty of places to choose from for our new home. Much of Africa and the Middle East have varying penalties for homosexuality.

I hear Saudi Arabia is nice this time of year, and they have the sense to have the death penalty to punish the gays. Of course, I won’t be able to drive there. If we women could drive, of course, it would “provoke a surge in prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and divorce.” We can’t have that. (And I’m sure I’ll get used to wearing an abaya.)

We’ll miss you and Katherine, Dad, but you know we just can’t have the gays running around and being happy together, let alone paying taxes and expecting equal treatment.

I know this sounds different from what I’ve said in the past, but I’ve seen the error of my ways. Thanks to Fox Nation, Pat Buchanan and Rush, of course, Eddie and I now realize that the gays are destroying our marriage (and here I thought it was all the time I spent ignoring him when I was working on my dissertation). During this dark time for heterosexual marriage, we now know that we must look to beacons of hope such as Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries, Newt Gingrich, and, of course, Rush himself to educate us on how traditional marriage is supposed to work.

If Saudi Arabia doesn’t work out, there’s always the Moon. Newt won’t allow a bunch of gays up there, I’m sure. I know he’s out of the race for 2012, but there’s always hope for 2016.

Love always,
Beth

Read Full Post »

“Belly of the Beast”

Posted in Random, tagged , , , , on March 18, 2012| 1 Comment »

Lured by the media’s suggestion that the Savannah St. Patrick’s day crowd could be the largest ever, I left my family and the quiet comfort of our home and headed downtown.

Why?

Because if there’s going to be insanity on display, then I want to see it.

The first time I witnessed the St. Pat’s festivities in Savannah, I was a sophomore in college. The fraternity for which I was a little sister was part of the parade. I spent my time in a fetal position in the back seat of the “float” (which was a van with signs on it). Green beer was not what took me down; it was a tainted hamburger.

Anyway, I arrived downtown just as the parade finished. My mistake. The cops directing traffic were already irritated, and the day was young. I found a parking place without too much trouble (what a shock!), met up with Royce (a frequent partner in crime), and headed to River Street.

As we walked down the Factors Walk steps, Royce said, “Here we go into the belly of the beast.” Then the drunk guy behind us repeated it, adding “That’s about right.”

So, without further ado, here is what you missed if you didn’t heed the beast’s call to “GET IT MAH BELLY!”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Read Full Post »

Let’s talk about sex, baby

Posted in Random, tagged , , , , , , , , on March 4, 2012| 2 Comments »

I get it. I do.

Rush Limbaugh makes his living by making outrageous statements and polarizing people. He thrives on controversy because that drives an increase in listeners. His livelihood depends on him being a jerk.

So no one should be surprised at his latest antics, and that it took three days for him to apologize to Sandra Fluke. He had to make sure that people were good and outraged. He had to make sure people were paying attention to him.

It’s all part of his shtick. I doubt he even believes all the things he says. I worry more about the people who actually listen to him, believe him, agree with him, and use his words to get fired up in their own lives and voting booths.

But let’s look at the controversy. I don’t mean birth control pills or whether it is actually used for contraception (in many cases, it is not). I don’t mean Limbaugh’s crazy assumption that you need to have a pill each time you have sex. I mean the issue of women having sex in the first place (something that frightens Rick Santorum very much).

Limbaugh said about Fluke, “She’s having so much sex, it’s amazing she can still walk.” That wasn’t the point of her congressional committee testimony, and I have no idea whether she is getting it on regularly or not. But what if she is? So what?

Why is it still OK, in 2012, to brand a woman as a “slut” for enjoying herself? Men have been doing it for years, and earning acclaim (see Warren Beatty, Hugh Hefner, Gene Simmons, Gerard Butler, etc.). Note the difference between the terms “ladies man” and “whore.”

Why are we still rooted in the 1950s idea of what a woman should do and be? I should ask my mother-in-law. She’s still pissed that I’m not home all day with the kids. (It doesn’t impress her a bit that I have a Ph.D., great job, and I make it home in time to cook dinner for Eddie every day.)

Why aren’t there more women in positions of power in the United States? According to the 2010 Census, woman outnumber men 157 million to 151.8 million.

I’ll tell you why: Women often have a hard time getting along with other women. You need proof? Watch this season of “Survivor.” (Or don’t. It is embarrassing.) This season’s twist is that all the contestants are in the same camp, but they are on teams by gender.

Instead of using their collective skills and knowledge to work together and build a shelter, make fire, etc., they’ve been racing over to the men’s shelter to “get warm for five minutes.” (If you know you are going to be on “Survivor,” wouldn’t you practice making fire?)

They lost an easy challenge because they could not figure out how to work together.

I want these smart, strong women to start supporting and relying on each other. Men are often dismissive of women; women shouldn’t do it too.

I know, I know: Aggressive men are “go-getters” while aggressive women are “bitches.” But the fact that women outnumber men means that we can change that image, as long as we aren’t doing the name-calling also.

March is Women’s History Month. Women, now is the time to speak up, speak out, make a difference.

And if you want to get it on with hundreds of people, Sandra Fluke, do it. I won’t judge you. Limbaugh can kiss my butt as it walks away to help foster true equality.

Read Full Post »

Reader discretion warning

Posted in Random, tagged , , , , , , , on February 28, 2012| 10 Comments »

Warning: This post contains graphic images and text that may be disturbing to sensitive readers.

(Don’t say I didn’t warn you.)

I don’t usually talk about politics in this blog, but I’m concerned about the Republican Party. They’ve had four years to get their act together and this is what they’ve come up with:

How are these guys the best the party can offer?

I can’t address all the craziness these folks have perpetrated over the past few months. Here are a few of the tastiest tidbits.

Mitt Romney

During an economic policy address at Ford Field in Detroit, he mentioned that his wife “drives a couple of Cadillacs.” Later, he explained that they were parked at their different houses. You know, for convenience. Oh. OK. Of course. He must not have learned anything from poor John McCain in 2008.

Romney is like the uptight, nerdy dad trying desperately to “get real” with the cool teenage son. Think Phil Dunphy.

Rick Santorum

At a speech at an Americans for Prosperity forum in Michigan, he derided Obama as a “snob” for suggesting that Americans should go to college. Hmmm … I guess he knows a thing or two about college. He has three degrees: a B.A., M.B.A. and J.D. I suppose he was indoctrinated by those “liberal college professors.” Quelle horreur!

And, by the way, look at the priority other countries place on higher education. The United States is slipping further behind. Do we really want to be the Patrick Star of the globe?

With his sweater vest, he reminds me of the teenaged son’s irritating, know-it-all best friend: Eddie Haskell.

Newt Gingrich

How is he a viable candidate? Let’s give credit to the flux capacitor that transported us back to the 1990s. It was a more innocent time. He was able to squall freely about Bill Clinton’s sexcapades while carrying on a hot and heavy affair with Whitehall Barbie. And he’s trying to represent a party that espouses family values such as preserving the sanctity of marriage. OK. Oh, and he wants to colonize the moon.

He’s like the drunk uncle who passes out on the couch during the family meal. Or like an older Arthur.

Ron Paul

It is amazing that he is running as a Republican in 2012, considering his Libertarianesque leaning (that is actually more like the Republican Party of old). I guess he thinks the Republicans are his best chance (according to him, “parties are pretty irrelevant”). He’s clearly not considered a contender. The debates were tough to watch. Even though the man was speaking some sense, his opponents looked at him patronizingly.

In the family dynamic, Paul is the senile grandpa allowed at the dinner table until he pinches the daughter-in-law’s backside when she goes for more rolls. Then it’s back to the nursing home for Old Man Simpson.

So this is what we’ve got:

Lest you think I’m a “liberal college professor” or part of the “left-wing media,” I’m not giving Democrats a pass. They’ve just (wisely) kept their collective mouths shut and let the crazies duke it out.

In the interest of full disclosure, I do have to unveil a skeleton in my closet. (Remember, I warned you about graphic images.) Here it is in all its tattered, bony glory:

I was Newt’s press intern during the Jim Wright scandal. So glad the days of “mindless cannibalism” are over. Oh … wait.

(Notice my hand is in my OWN pocket.)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »