Welcome to the Golden Age of Men's magazines!
Sometime during the 50's and 60's, before the sexual revolution, sexual desire was that secret thing inside of you: somewhere in between sin and scat was the horrible inirtia of sex in the masculine mind. And where did this energy go? Why, into the exciting world of Men's magazines!
Why just look at this.
Ms. Johnson, take a note wont you.
Man, I can't even sleep with socks on let alone a buttoned to the neck three piece suit.
What kept men up late at night? Taking phone calls and dictating notes?
Yes, the silent scourge of drink. After a long day of being cooped up in the house with no TV worth watching and not being able to read (I think it was illegal for women to learn how to read in the 50's) that liquor cabinet would look damn good to me to.
Ah yes, that familiar release. One could fully explore their fetish for wide hipped, no intestined, dismembered women in the guise of sexy negligé adverts. It is tough for a guy who fawns over idealized body shapes a women could only possess with the aid of a colostomy bag.
But then, when we make cages/receptacles for other people, don't we also make them for ourselves?
Man, this is hot! A better chastity belt couldn't have been fashioned from iron. Ladies, make sure your man doesn't have the sexual freedom to talk to his secretary in bed or whack off to limbless gals again! Inflatable butt plug not included.
James's Journal
My Podcast Link
10/19/2007 23:39 #41721
The Golden Age of Men's Magazines10/18/2007 11:34 #41700
Two Things Americans Love About AsiaHi,
I am in two classes that deal with Asia this semester. They are both my least favorite classes too. Not because I don't like Asia. Nope, I really like Chinese history, Japanese lit. and Korean pet-names for children: Dun Teggie (which translates to 'shit pig'). But man, these classes are bad.
I have noticed over the semester that American's love two things about Asia: 1) The Dalai Lama 2) Singapore. These are two things I don't much care for.
Free Tibet bumper stickers litter the cars of every university parking lot. Americans love Tibet, though they don't know very much about it. We imagine a peaceful land that finds injustice and disparity abhorrent. We ignore that it is a brutal, feudal society which exists to support their god-emperor. Peasants are horribly oppressed, they are Serfs.
The Dalai Lama has raised thousands of dollars for Tibetan seperatists. Ya, that means guns and bombs and stuff. He gives men like Richard Gere and Stephen Segal titles of spiritual nobility because they give lots of money.
Man, can't wait to go back to that in a free Tibet (which, by the way, has been a part of China for hundreds of years). I mean, ya, they have a right to self-determination and all. But an independent Quebec should be higher on our list than a backwards and violent Tibet.
Then there is Singapore. It is so CLEAN! Have you seen how clean it is? Singapore is one clean city! You would think these people have never been to Canada or Sweden by the way they gawk at Singapore's cleanliness.
Did you know that you can spend time in jail for possessing gum in Singapore? Did you know that poppy seeds are illegal? Did you know that the government recently made it illegal to rent apartments to same sex couples?
Singapore has the highest per capita rate of capital punishment in the world. Ya, they leave China and Iran in the dust. The murder rate is relativly low. Most executions are given to drug offenders. 22 grams of coke will get you murdered by the state.
Singapore is a police state. But it is so CLEAN!
AH! I mean, look this shit up on a wiki. It's not like the information is hard to find people.
I am in two classes that deal with Asia this semester. They are both my least favorite classes too. Not because I don't like Asia. Nope, I really like Chinese history, Japanese lit. and Korean pet-names for children: Dun Teggie (which translates to 'shit pig'). But man, these classes are bad.
I have noticed over the semester that American's love two things about Asia: 1) The Dalai Lama 2) Singapore. These are two things I don't much care for.
Free Tibet bumper stickers litter the cars of every university parking lot. Americans love Tibet, though they don't know very much about it. We imagine a peaceful land that finds injustice and disparity abhorrent. We ignore that it is a brutal, feudal society which exists to support their god-emperor. Peasants are horribly oppressed, they are Serfs.
The Dalai Lama has raised thousands of dollars for Tibetan seperatists. Ya, that means guns and bombs and stuff. He gives men like Richard Gere and Stephen Segal titles of spiritual nobility because they give lots of money.
Man, can't wait to go back to that in a free Tibet (which, by the way, has been a part of China for hundreds of years). I mean, ya, they have a right to self-determination and all. But an independent Quebec should be higher on our list than a backwards and violent Tibet.
Then there is Singapore. It is so CLEAN! Have you seen how clean it is? Singapore is one clean city! You would think these people have never been to Canada or Sweden by the way they gawk at Singapore's cleanliness.
Did you know that you can spend time in jail for possessing gum in Singapore? Did you know that poppy seeds are illegal? Did you know that the government recently made it illegal to rent apartments to same sex couples?
Singapore has the highest per capita rate of capital punishment in the world. Ya, they leave China and Iran in the dust. The murder rate is relativly low. Most executions are given to drug offenders. 22 grams of coke will get you murdered by the state.
Singapore is a police state. But it is so CLEAN!
AH! I mean, look this shit up on a wiki. It's not like the information is hard to find people.
james - 10/19/07 21:44
Pliny, will you marry me?
I hadn't even thought of Dalei-G's effect on India! Thank you so much for enlightening me ^_^
Pliny, will you marry me?
I hadn't even thought of Dalei-G's effect on India! Thank you so much for enlightening me ^_^
tinypliny - 10/19/07 21:41
Interesting discussion. Here's something else to add to the mix. The "Dalai Lama" was given political asylum by India in 1959 and he lives in a palatial house in Delhi when he is not jetsetting round the world. As an Indian, and as a Delhite, I not only resent him, but also this absurd and totally unwise decision.
A major chunk of India's GDP goes into stockpiling against Pakistan and China. There is constant friction at the two frontiers. Lives are lost, money and resources are unecessarily wasted every year. I think the friction with China is almost 90% due to the ridiculous Dalai Lama situation. Not only is he a drain on Delhi's resources (because of all the black-cat security and diplomatic carriageway blocks), he is a drain on my country's economy. He is one of a million reasons why India's public sector health spending is about 0.5% and India comes 172nd among the 175 nations which spend any amount of money for public health. He is one of the main reasons why China is constantly at loggerheads with India.
What worsens my opinion of the whole situation is that, as an individual, I think he is as medieval and insular as Mother Teresa was. Steeped in obsequiousness to the rich and powerful, bloated in their egos, pedantic in their outlook and indescribably non-progressive in their attitudes, I am not sure what the hell my country saw in them to grant them so much power and influence.
Of course, there are conspiracy theorists everywhere. One favourite conspiracy theory is that the Jawaharlal Nehru, our first Prime Minister, bargained with Eisenhower for nuclear power/ knowledge swap in exchange for granting the greedy lama, political asylum. I could easily believe this of Nehru - who was largely responsible for bringing the establishment of modern science to India, however, I am not sure I can actually take the step of believing that he dealt with the US at the height of the cold war, when we were best friends with Russia. He may have been very aggressive and ambitious as a leader, but double crossing Russia, dealing with US for nuclear power and antagonizing China was too much calculated masked cunning, even for him.
Interesting discussion. Here's something else to add to the mix. The "Dalai Lama" was given political asylum by India in 1959 and he lives in a palatial house in Delhi when he is not jetsetting round the world. As an Indian, and as a Delhite, I not only resent him, but also this absurd and totally unwise decision.
A major chunk of India's GDP goes into stockpiling against Pakistan and China. There is constant friction at the two frontiers. Lives are lost, money and resources are unecessarily wasted every year. I think the friction with China is almost 90% due to the ridiculous Dalai Lama situation. Not only is he a drain on Delhi's resources (because of all the black-cat security and diplomatic carriageway blocks), he is a drain on my country's economy. He is one of a million reasons why India's public sector health spending is about 0.5% and India comes 172nd among the 175 nations which spend any amount of money for public health. He is one of the main reasons why China is constantly at loggerheads with India.
What worsens my opinion of the whole situation is that, as an individual, I think he is as medieval and insular as Mother Teresa was. Steeped in obsequiousness to the rich and powerful, bloated in their egos, pedantic in their outlook and indescribably non-progressive in their attitudes, I am not sure what the hell my country saw in them to grant them so much power and influence.
Of course, there are conspiracy theorists everywhere. One favourite conspiracy theory is that the Jawaharlal Nehru, our first Prime Minister, bargained with Eisenhower for nuclear power/ knowledge swap in exchange for granting the greedy lama, political asylum. I could easily believe this of Nehru - who was largely responsible for bringing the establishment of modern science to India, however, I am not sure I can actually take the step of believing that he dealt with the US at the height of the cold war, when we were best friends with Russia. He may have been very aggressive and ambitious as a leader, but double crossing Russia, dealing with US for nuclear power and antagonizing China was too much calculated masked cunning, even for him.
james - 10/19/07 14:01
It only takes 22 grams of coke to get hung. Which is ridiculous.
Also, you cannot get a single poppy seed in the country because you could potentially turn it into heoin. Ridiculous!
But that is a hilarious joke to play on your nervous friend.
It only takes 22 grams of coke to get hung. Which is ridiculous.
Also, you cannot get a single poppy seed in the country because you could potentially turn it into heoin. Ridiculous!
But that is a hilarious joke to play on your nervous friend.
jbeatty - 10/19/07 09:36
All over the guidebooks/websites I read before I went to Malaysia had little blurbs about not bringing any sort of drugs to that country because they would put you to death. I think I made my travel companion a bit nervous on the plane ride when I kept making references to breaking out the party bong the moment we landed.
All over the guidebooks/websites I read before I went to Malaysia had little blurbs about not bringing any sort of drugs to that country because they would put you to death. I think I made my travel companion a bit nervous on the plane ride when I kept making references to breaking out the party bong the moment we landed.
metalpeter - 10/18/07 19:01
So Never been to Asia but that being said there are some things to like about it that no one said.
1) The Cool gadgets
2) The old Ancient buildings
3) The new super modern buildings
4) The women
5) Anime (what ever kind you are into)
6) Karate Movies
7) gorgeous country sides
That is all I can think of right now. In terms of a free tibet, I don't know enough about it to really say anything other then that it seems like the people may really want to be free.
So Never been to Asia but that being said there are some things to like about it that no one said.
1) The Cool gadgets
2) The old Ancient buildings
3) The new super modern buildings
4) The women
5) Anime (what ever kind you are into)
6) Karate Movies
7) gorgeous country sides
That is all I can think of right now. In terms of a free tibet, I don't know enough about it to really say anything other then that it seems like the people may really want to be free.
james - 10/18/07 14:48
ya, before this I thought you were as dull as dry toast.
No ^_^ It just took me this long to say it.
ya, before this I thought you were as dull as dry toast.
No ^_^ It just took me this long to say it.
janelle - 10/18/07 14:36
It took you this long to figure out I'm an interesting person? I'm shocked!
It took you this long to figure out I'm an interesting person? I'm shocked!
james - 10/18/07 14:33
Janelle, you are one interesting person. Next social occasion we should chat (slur in my case) together.
Janelle, you are one interesting person. Next social occasion we should chat (slur in my case) together.
james - 10/18/07 14:29
HA! It would be funny that China would bring increased religious oppression considering the mass killings of the Cultural Revolution.
I need to ask around about sources on what actual Tibetans think because they are such a minority population in a nation where journalists are heavily censored and jailed (I think China jails more journalists per capita than any other nation.)
HA! It would be funny that China would bring increased religious oppression considering the mass killings of the Cultural Revolution.
I need to ask around about sources on what actual Tibetans think because they are such a minority population in a nation where journalists are heavily censored and jailed (I think China jails more journalists per capita than any other nation.)
janelle - 10/18/07 14:28
To add something light to the conversation, what I personally like about Asia is the different way of thinking in Vietnam exemplified by the phrase, "Same, same, but different!".
Ask a Vietnamese person...
Does A=only A?
Yes, they reply
Does B=only B?
Yes, they reply.
So can A=B?
Yes, they reply.
I love the way they can hold two contradictory ideas without the need for resolution. I mentioned this in a post I recently made on (e:jim)'s blog.
To add something light to the conversation, what I personally like about Asia is the different way of thinking in Vietnam exemplified by the phrase, "Same, same, but different!".
Ask a Vietnamese person...
Does A=only A?
Yes, they reply
Does B=only B?
Yes, they reply.
So can A=B?
Yes, they reply.
I love the way they can hold two contradictory ideas without the need for resolution. I mentioned this in a post I recently made on (e:jim)'s blog.
janelle - 10/18/07 14:24
I agree. Liberals in particular (very unfortunately) have a "head over heels in love" approach to too many issues with no substantial basis or rationale. Tibet is most definitely one of them.
That would be an interesting story indeed, what the non-monks in Tibet think about the modernization brought by China that decreased religious oppression. My brother knew someone from Ethiopia who talked about the difficulties in acknowledging the positive changes (largely infrastructural changes) that Italy brought to the country without condoning its oppression of the Ethiopian people.
I agree. Liberals in particular (very unfortunately) have a "head over heels in love" approach to too many issues with no substantial basis or rationale. Tibet is most definitely one of them.
That would be an interesting story indeed, what the non-monks in Tibet think about the modernization brought by China that decreased religious oppression. My brother knew someone from Ethiopia who talked about the difficulties in acknowledging the positive changes (largely infrastructural changes) that Italy brought to the country without condoning its oppression of the Ethiopian people.
james - 10/18/07 14:15
Janelle:
I mentioned that I think Tibet has the right to self-determination. If they want independence I hope they get it. I also hope that they modernize and don't go back to their old system of government.
Tibet was a tributary state to China for hundreds of years, as was most of East Asia. Tibet was formally annexed in the 17th century. The second and fifth Dalai Lama's got their authority to rule directly from the emperor of China. So, I would say that the connection to China is much stronger than other tributary states. But again, this isn't definitive grounds for Tibet's eternal status as a province of big momma China.
What I don't like about the West's love for the Free-Tibet movement is that it is couched in the leadership and legitimization of the Dalai Lama. Support for a free, democratic Tibet though would be sweet.
Also, China has done much to modernize Tibet. Lasha has gone from an oversized shrine to the Dalai Lama to an actual city with industry and jobs. I wonder what the feelings of non-monk Tibetans are towards the Chinese state, despite the repression and dickheadery.
Vietnam isn't a nation I know a great deal about. But China has supported various dynasties in Vietnam throughout the years in an attempt to maintain the tributary relationship. It is the same model they used in all neighboring states with the exception of Tibet and Steppe peoples whom they conquered in the 17th century and fully integrated into the empire.
My complaint in this post was that Americans are woefully ignorant of what life in Tibet was/is like for common people and blindly support a represive regime in exile. But you raise a lot of really good questions.
Janelle:
I mentioned that I think Tibet has the right to self-determination. If they want independence I hope they get it. I also hope that they modernize and don't go back to their old system of government.
Tibet was a tributary state to China for hundreds of years, as was most of East Asia. Tibet was formally annexed in the 17th century. The second and fifth Dalai Lama's got their authority to rule directly from the emperor of China. So, I would say that the connection to China is much stronger than other tributary states. But again, this isn't definitive grounds for Tibet's eternal status as a province of big momma China.
What I don't like about the West's love for the Free-Tibet movement is that it is couched in the leadership and legitimization of the Dalai Lama. Support for a free, democratic Tibet though would be sweet.
Also, China has done much to modernize Tibet. Lasha has gone from an oversized shrine to the Dalai Lama to an actual city with industry and jobs. I wonder what the feelings of non-monk Tibetans are towards the Chinese state, despite the repression and dickheadery.
Vietnam isn't a nation I know a great deal about. But China has supported various dynasties in Vietnam throughout the years in an attempt to maintain the tributary relationship. It is the same model they used in all neighboring states with the exception of Tibet and Steppe peoples whom they conquered in the 17th century and fully integrated into the empire.
My complaint in this post was that Americans are woefully ignorant of what life in Tibet was/is like for common people and blindly support a represive regime in exile. But you raise a lot of really good questions.
james - 10/18/07 12:43
Why people should love Asia:
1) Half the people on the planet live there
2) The novel was invented in Japan
3) tanka and haiku poetry
4) Chinese poetry was immensely influential on the beats, notably Allen Ginsburg
5) The religious texts of India are some of the best written mythology on the planet
6) the food, the food, the food
7) Korean soap operas are hilarious
8) most things you own were made there
9) Asians have a bunch of synchratic religions. Which makes them a real interesting model to study.
10) China has changed more in the last 50 years than it has in the last 5,000 years. That is very interesting.
see, a top ten of things I like. Take that (e:drew)!
Why people should love Asia:
1) Half the people on the planet live there
2) The novel was invented in Japan
3) tanka and haiku poetry
4) Chinese poetry was immensely influential on the beats, notably Allen Ginsburg
5) The religious texts of India are some of the best written mythology on the planet
6) the food, the food, the food
7) Korean soap operas are hilarious
8) most things you own were made there
9) Asians have a bunch of synchratic religions. Which makes them a real interesting model to study.
10) China has changed more in the last 50 years than it has in the last 5,000 years. That is very interesting.
see, a top ten of things I like. Take that (e:drew)!
janelle - 10/18/07 12:43
The fact that Tibet is historically a "backwards", feudal society that exists to support its God-emperor is not a substantial argument against freeing Tibet from China.
Could it be possible that while Tibet may be united in fighting China, the country might splinter once free from China and find itself with many different views on how to run the country some of which might lead it away from being a feudal society? Tibet borders Nepal and shares a common culture, doesn't it? Is it possible that Nepalese Maoists have influenced Tibetan politics? These are sincere questions, not rhetorical questions. Maybe you know since you're studying Asian history right now or can find out.
The argument that Tibet should remain part of China because it has been part of China for hundreds of years makes for interesting discussion. My understanding of the history (and again, correct me since you're studying the material right now) is that Tibet paid tribute to China and China allowed Tibet to rule itself. That's a pretty tenuous connection.
China having existed for such a long time has a very broad historical perspective, I should think. While in Vietnam we learned that at one time, China ruled what is now Vietnam for around two centuries (14th and 15th centuries is what I remember, do you know?). Vietnamese threw off Chinese rule and established the country of Vietnam. From that time on, China has made various military forays into Vietnam and has argued that Vietnam is a "renegade territory" up through the mid 1900s. Does that sounds familiar or what? So, if the Tibet situation has similarities to Vietnam, then I would be hard pressed to consider Tibet as part of China.
The fact that Tibet is historically a "backwards", feudal society that exists to support its God-emperor is not a substantial argument against freeing Tibet from China.
Could it be possible that while Tibet may be united in fighting China, the country might splinter once free from China and find itself with many different views on how to run the country some of which might lead it away from being a feudal society? Tibet borders Nepal and shares a common culture, doesn't it? Is it possible that Nepalese Maoists have influenced Tibetan politics? These are sincere questions, not rhetorical questions. Maybe you know since you're studying Asian history right now or can find out.
The argument that Tibet should remain part of China because it has been part of China for hundreds of years makes for interesting discussion. My understanding of the history (and again, correct me since you're studying the material right now) is that Tibet paid tribute to China and China allowed Tibet to rule itself. That's a pretty tenuous connection.
China having existed for such a long time has a very broad historical perspective, I should think. While in Vietnam we learned that at one time, China ruled what is now Vietnam for around two centuries (14th and 15th centuries is what I remember, do you know?). Vietnamese threw off Chinese rule and established the country of Vietnam. From that time on, China has made various military forays into Vietnam and has argued that Vietnam is a "renegade territory" up through the mid 1900s. Does that sounds familiar or what? So, if the Tibet situation has similarities to Vietnam, then I would be hard pressed to consider Tibet as part of China.
jason - 10/18/07 12:15
What should people like about Asia? Do you have any faves?
What should people like about Asia? Do you have any faves?
10/16/2007 21:01 #41680
Why I Don't Like Rachel Ray(e:Joshua) has been talking about cooking. Well, (e:Jbeaty) has been talking about cooking a lot and (e:Joshua) brought it up. But it made me think about why I don't like Rachel Ray.
The thing about her is, she makes meals in twenty minutes. They are simple foods that everyday Americans would love to eat. Nothing fancy, no ingredient they can't get in a regular grocery store, nothing difficult to pronounce. Her set is like her food, simple and a bit nostalgic with a retro fridge and not a scrap of stainless steal in site. It would evoke grandmas kitchen where you brought in some eggs from the hen house.
And yet this whole air is betrayed by the window. Grandmas farm kitchen is apparently in a high rise in Manhattan, with the visible skyline of that city etched out between those yellow country curtains. This is the lie she serves up, that the everyday, the humdrum, is somehow extra ordinary and classy.
There is pleasure in the regular home cooked meal. A meal so simple anyone could make it. And that is the charm of Rachel Ray, anyone really can make it. Her recipes litter the grocery store aisles on packages of triscuts, miracle whip, ketchup. It is food that anyone with a passing interest in cooking can make. It is a pat on the back to the mediocre and the store bought.
Rachel Ray is not edifying. We learn, essentially, nothing from her. Julia Child took America into culinary worlds we had not yet imagined! French cooking with serious technique became fashionable, dethroning jell-o molds and aspic. Now, ecen greasy spoon diners will serve a sandwitch au ju. Her effect on America's palate is immeasurable.
On the other hand, Ray sends us into a bit of a time warp. With Julia we realized the importance of technique, with Ray we trade that for ready made. Rachel Ray is making the meat and potato meals of days of yore in an age where eating bears the scientific name gastronomique.
A celebration of the everyday isn't really a good use of time, but man can it get you sponsorships.
The thing about her is, she makes meals in twenty minutes. They are simple foods that everyday Americans would love to eat. Nothing fancy, no ingredient they can't get in a regular grocery store, nothing difficult to pronounce. Her set is like her food, simple and a bit nostalgic with a retro fridge and not a scrap of stainless steal in site. It would evoke grandmas kitchen where you brought in some eggs from the hen house.
And yet this whole air is betrayed by the window. Grandmas farm kitchen is apparently in a high rise in Manhattan, with the visible skyline of that city etched out between those yellow country curtains. This is the lie she serves up, that the everyday, the humdrum, is somehow extra ordinary and classy.
There is pleasure in the regular home cooked meal. A meal so simple anyone could make it. And that is the charm of Rachel Ray, anyone really can make it. Her recipes litter the grocery store aisles on packages of triscuts, miracle whip, ketchup. It is food that anyone with a passing interest in cooking can make. It is a pat on the back to the mediocre and the store bought.
Rachel Ray is not edifying. We learn, essentially, nothing from her. Julia Child took America into culinary worlds we had not yet imagined! French cooking with serious technique became fashionable, dethroning jell-o molds and aspic. Now, ecen greasy spoon diners will serve a sandwitch au ju. Her effect on America's palate is immeasurable.
On the other hand, Ray sends us into a bit of a time warp. With Julia we realized the importance of technique, with Ray we trade that for ready made. Rachel Ray is making the meat and potato meals of days of yore in an age where eating bears the scientific name gastronomique.
A celebration of the everyday isn't really a good use of time, but man can it get you sponsorships.
libertad - 09/23/10 11:28
Yum-O kids! Just a couple of turns around the pan with the EVOO. Barf!
Yum-O kids! Just a couple of turns around the pan with the EVOO. Barf!
tinypliny - 10/17/07 23:43
I didn't know who this character was till this minute. Woe. Now her hideous perenially smiling face is stuck in my head thanks to a miscalculated google image search.
What's with her and that Julia Roberts person. They have waaayy too inhumanly wide smiles.
Ick.
I didn't know who this character was till this minute. Woe. Now her hideous perenially smiling face is stuck in my head thanks to a miscalculated google image search.
What's with her and that Julia Roberts person. They have waaayy too inhumanly wide smiles.
Ick.
joshua - 10/17/07 14:25
Giada is full of shit - I'll never believe that she actually eats what she cooks. Theres a phony!
I harbor secret milf feelings for Sandra Lee.
Giada is full of shit - I'll never believe that she actually eats what she cooks. Theres a phony!
I harbor secret milf feelings for Sandra Lee.
mrmike - 10/17/07 12:03
Ya'all making me hungry
Ya'all making me hungry
jenks - 10/17/07 11:52
Ok, the only thing I really know about RR is "EVOO". And that she has a pit bull. I've never seen her show.
And while I agree with James and jbeatty- I also don't think a friendly 'cooking for dummies' type show is such a bad thing... Ok, so it's a 20 minute recipe with easy ingredients that anyone can make. If it's that instead of feeding your kids hamburger helper- I'm all for it.
My brother in law hates Giada De Laurentiis with a PASSION. His usual phrase is "oooooh! I want to kick her teeth in!"
And it's hysterical to hear my mom get all riled up about "Semi-Homemade with Sandra Lee" and her 'tablescapes'. (have to admit I've never seen that show but it sounds horrendous.)
the point buried in there is- there's something out there for everyone. But most stupid americans can't handle much more than rachel-style, so we're inundated.
Ok, the only thing I really know about RR is "EVOO". And that she has a pit bull. I've never seen her show.
And while I agree with James and jbeatty- I also don't think a friendly 'cooking for dummies' type show is such a bad thing... Ok, so it's a 20 minute recipe with easy ingredients that anyone can make. If it's that instead of feeding your kids hamburger helper- I'm all for it.
My brother in law hates Giada De Laurentiis with a PASSION. His usual phrase is "oooooh! I want to kick her teeth in!"
And it's hysterical to hear my mom get all riled up about "Semi-Homemade with Sandra Lee" and her 'tablescapes'. (have to admit I've never seen that show but it sounds horrendous.)
the point buried in there is- there's something out there for everyone. But most stupid americans can't handle much more than rachel-style, so we're inundated.
joshua - 10/17/07 09:35
Scalliwags!
Scalliwags!
mrdt - 10/16/07 23:19
From a 15 veteran cook/chef Rachel Ray scares me. I couldn't agree with you more. Real cooks know she can't hold a knife and most of the food she produces on her show comes from culinary grads that perfect the recipe in a lab.
Stop with that fake laugh for fuck's sake.
From a 15 veteran cook/chef Rachel Ray scares me. I couldn't agree with you more. Real cooks know she can't hold a knife and most of the food she produces on her show comes from culinary grads that perfect the recipe in a lab.
Stop with that fake laugh for fuck's sake.
mike - 10/16/07 23:02
I love Rachel Ray. Ok I don't watch her but in theory I love her. What's wrong with simple! It's what I'm all about! Like who has time to make really coplicated meals! Not I! Oh wait i don't cook any meals. I do feel that way about fashion shows though, they should be truly outrageous and unruly and not practical!
I love Rachel Ray. Ok I don't watch her but in theory I love her. What's wrong with simple! It's what I'm all about! Like who has time to make really coplicated meals! Not I! Oh wait i don't cook any meals. I do feel that way about fashion shows though, they should be truly outrageous and unruly and not practical!
jbeatty - 10/16/07 22:41
Well put, I couldn't agree more. Besides her irritatingly cute persona her entire gig is against everything I enjoy about cooking. To dumb it down for the masses is fine, but I truly want no part of it. She is nothing more than a slightly attractive spokesperson for way too many products, who also happens to cook. I would much rather read, or watch an actual chef who is showing me something I have never even imagined existed. Cooking and eating is about discovery. For me its learning about other cultures though what they eat, sometimes even how and why they eat it. Her show and approach lack this. She is the "celebrity chef" run amok. It all started with Emeril who I don't doubt knows what the fuck he is doing. But the image he presents on his live show just annoys the shit out of me. Rachael Ray is this times ten, in addition to to being a hack.
Well put, I couldn't agree more. Besides her irritatingly cute persona her entire gig is against everything I enjoy about cooking. To dumb it down for the masses is fine, but I truly want no part of it. She is nothing more than a slightly attractive spokesperson for way too many products, who also happens to cook. I would much rather read, or watch an actual chef who is showing me something I have never even imagined existed. Cooking and eating is about discovery. For me its learning about other cultures though what they eat, sometimes even how and why they eat it. Her show and approach lack this. She is the "celebrity chef" run amok. It all started with Emeril who I don't doubt knows what the fuck he is doing. But the image he presents on his live show just annoys the shit out of me. Rachael Ray is this times ten, in addition to to being a hack.
jason - 10/16/07 22:13
But (e:james) not all of us can cook. I would love to know how to make that stuff (e:jbeatty) showed us, but I just don't think I have the technique to make it work. Sometimes it has to be easy. I'll never woo the ladies making Chicken and Stars. Ask Josh, in High School he cooked a meal that I took credit for on Valentine's Day. Plus Gordon Ramsay always preaches that shit, keep it simple, although I'm sure he uses techniques I know nothing about yet.
But (e:james) not all of us can cook. I would love to know how to make that stuff (e:jbeatty) showed us, but I just don't think I have the technique to make it work. Sometimes it has to be easy. I'll never woo the ladies making Chicken and Stars. Ask Josh, in High School he cooked a meal that I took credit for on Valentine's Day. Plus Gordon Ramsay always preaches that shit, keep it simple, although I'm sure he uses techniques I know nothing about yet.
joshua - 10/16/07 22:07
We like the same girl!
We like the same girl!
fellyconnelly - 10/16/07 22:06
yeah and that weird mouth of hers!
down with rachel ray!
even if she did look damn good in that maxim spread!
yeah and that weird mouth of hers!
down with rachel ray!
even if she did look damn good in that maxim spread!
joshua - 10/16/07 22:04
No, don't say it! I'm pretending that I didn't read any of this.
No, don't say it! I'm pretending that I didn't read any of this.
10/14/2007 18:44 #41651
Holy Crap! Crab Apples!Dude!
Crab Apples are so fricken sweet. Growing up we had a crab apple tree in our front yard that was constantly rotting. Like a much beloved fruit dispensing zombie.
They are as hard as rocks, slightly larger than grapes, and hurt like a song of a bitch when thrown.
Well, now is the time for them to ripen and fall off the tree; giving plenty of ammo to the poor souls forced to live under their projectile burden.
To make myself feel better, here is a picture of a crab apple titty.
ya, you so want to tap that
Crab Apples are so fricken sweet. Growing up we had a crab apple tree in our front yard that was constantly rotting. Like a much beloved fruit dispensing zombie.
They are as hard as rocks, slightly larger than grapes, and hurt like a song of a bitch when thrown.
Well, now is the time for them to ripen and fall off the tree; giving plenty of ammo to the poor souls forced to live under their projectile burden.
To make myself feel better, here is a picture of a crab apple titty.
ya, you so want to tap that
theecarey - 10/14/07 23:57
crab apple fights- what a trip down memory lane that thought takes me. I can still feel the sting of contact on my skin; and the well deserved pleasure of reciprocation.
crab apple fights- what a trip down memory lane that thought takes me. I can still feel the sting of contact on my skin; and the well deserved pleasure of reciprocation.
imk2 - 10/14/07 22:57
i'll never be able to look at an apple the same way again.
i'll never be able to look at an apple the same way again.
james - 10/14/07 19:42
No wonder the strippers with inverted nipples are so much more for a lap dance!
No wonder the strippers with inverted nipples are so much more for a lap dance!
tinypliny - 10/14/07 19:24
An inverted nipple, suspicious nipple discharge and discolouration are signs of impending breast cancer.
An inverted nipple, suspicious nipple discharge and discolouration are signs of impending breast cancer.
10/15/2007 14:59 #41662
Stephen Colbert Writes for Maureen DowdEver since the NY Times let me once again have access to their op/ed section I have been doing basicly what I have been for the last four years since they initially restricted access.... reading other things. But I could not turn away from the synergistic pizzazz of the fluffy snark Maureen Dowd with the cuddly Stephen Colbert.
You can read it here
Or you can read it in its entirety below.
enjoy kittens
OP-ED COLUMNIST
A Mock Columnist, Amok
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 14, 2007
I was in my office, writing a column on the injustice of relative marginal tax rates for hedge fund managers, when I saw Stephen Colbert on TV.
He was sneering that Times columns make good "kindling." He was ranting that after you throw away the paper, "it takes over a hundred years for the lies to biodegrade." He was observing, approvingly, that "Dick Cheney's fondest pipe dream is driving a bulldozer into The New York Times while drinking crude oil out of Keith Olbermann's skull."
I called Colbert with a dare: if he thought it was so easy to be a Times Op-Ed pundit, he should try it. He came right over. In a moment of weakness, I had staged a coup d'moi. I just hope he leaves at some point. He's typing and drinking and threatening to "shave Paul Krugman with a broken bottle."
I Am an Op-Ed Columnist (And So Can You!)
By STEPHEN COLBERT
Surprised to see my byline here, aren't you? I would be too, if I read The New York Times. But I don't. So I'll just have to take your word that this was published. Frankly, I prefer emoticons to the written word, and if you disagree :(
I'd like to thank Maureen Dowd for permitting/begging me to write her column today. As I type this, she's watching from an overstuffed divan, petting her prize Abyssinian and sipping a Dirty Cosmotinijito. Which reminds me: Before I get started, I have to take care of one other bit of business:
Bad things are happening in countries you shouldn't have to think about. It's all George Bush's fault, the vice president is Satan, and God is gay.
There. Now I've written Frank Rich's column too.
So why I am writing Miss Dowd's column today? Simple. Because I believe the 2008 election, unlike all previous elections, is important. And a lot of Americans feel confused about the current crop of presidential candidates.
For instance, Hillary Clinton. I can't remember if I'm supposed to be scared of her so Democrats will think they should nominate her when she's actually easy to beat, or if I'm supposed to be scared of her because she's legitimately scary.
Or Rudy Giuliani. I can't remember if I'm supposed to support him because he's the one who can beat Hillary if she gets nominated, or if I'm supposed to support him because he's legitimately scary.
And Fred Thompson. In my opinion "Law & Order" never sufficiently explained why the Manhattan D.A. had an accent like an Appalachian catfish wrestler.
Well, suddenly an option is looming on the horizon. And I don't mean Al Gore (though he's a world-class loomer). First of all, I don't think Nobel Prizes should go to people I was seated next to at the Emmys. Second, winning the Nobel Prize does not automatically qualify you to be commander in chief. I think George Bush has proved definitively that to be president, you don't need to care about science, literature or peace.
While my hat is not presently in the ring, I should also point out that it is not on my head. So where's that hat? (Hint: John McCain was seen passing one at a gas station to fuel up the Straight Talk Express.)
Others point to my new bestseller, "I Am America (And So Can You!)" noting that many candidates test the waters with a book first. Just look at Barack Obama, John Edwards or O. J. Simpson.
Look at the moral guidance I offer. On faith: "After Jesus was born, the Old Testament basically became a way for Bible publishers to keep their word count up." On gender: "The sooner we accept the basic differences between men and women, the sooner we can stop arguing about it and start having sex." On race: "While skin and race are often synonymous, skin cleansing is good, race cleansing is bad." On the elderly: "They look like lizards."
Our nation is at a Fork in the Road. Some say we should go Left; some say go Right. I say, "Doesn't this thing have a reverse gear?" Let's back this country up to a time before there were forks in the road - or even roads. Or forks, for that matter. I want to return to a simpler America where we ate our meat off the end of a sharpened stick.
Let me regurgitate: I know why you want me to run, and I hear your clamor. I share Americans' nostalgia for an era when you not only could tell a man by the cut of his jib, but the jib industry hadn't yet fled to Guangdong. And I don't intend to tease you for weeks the way Newt Gingrich did, saying that if his supporters raised $30 million, he would run for president. I would run for 15 million. Cash.
Nevertheless, I am not ready to announce yet - even though it's clear that the voters are desperate for a white, male, middle-aged, Jesus-trumpeting alternative.
What do I offer? Hope for the common man. Because I am not the Anointed or the Inevitable. I am just an Average Joe like you - if you have a TV show.
You can read it here
Or you can read it in its entirety below.
enjoy kittens
OP-ED COLUMNIST
A Mock Columnist, Amok
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: October 14, 2007
I was in my office, writing a column on the injustice of relative marginal tax rates for hedge fund managers, when I saw Stephen Colbert on TV.
He was sneering that Times columns make good "kindling." He was ranting that after you throw away the paper, "it takes over a hundred years for the lies to biodegrade." He was observing, approvingly, that "Dick Cheney's fondest pipe dream is driving a bulldozer into The New York Times while drinking crude oil out of Keith Olbermann's skull."
I called Colbert with a dare: if he thought it was so easy to be a Times Op-Ed pundit, he should try it. He came right over. In a moment of weakness, I had staged a coup d'moi. I just hope he leaves at some point. He's typing and drinking and threatening to "shave Paul Krugman with a broken bottle."
I Am an Op-Ed Columnist (And So Can You!)
By STEPHEN COLBERT
Surprised to see my byline here, aren't you? I would be too, if I read The New York Times. But I don't. So I'll just have to take your word that this was published. Frankly, I prefer emoticons to the written word, and if you disagree :(
I'd like to thank Maureen Dowd for permitting/begging me to write her column today. As I type this, she's watching from an overstuffed divan, petting her prize Abyssinian and sipping a Dirty Cosmotinijito. Which reminds me: Before I get started, I have to take care of one other bit of business:
Bad things are happening in countries you shouldn't have to think about. It's all George Bush's fault, the vice president is Satan, and God is gay.
There. Now I've written Frank Rich's column too.
So why I am writing Miss Dowd's column today? Simple. Because I believe the 2008 election, unlike all previous elections, is important. And a lot of Americans feel confused about the current crop of presidential candidates.
For instance, Hillary Clinton. I can't remember if I'm supposed to be scared of her so Democrats will think they should nominate her when she's actually easy to beat, or if I'm supposed to be scared of her because she's legitimately scary.
Or Rudy Giuliani. I can't remember if I'm supposed to support him because he's the one who can beat Hillary if she gets nominated, or if I'm supposed to support him because he's legitimately scary.
And Fred Thompson. In my opinion "Law & Order" never sufficiently explained why the Manhattan D.A. had an accent like an Appalachian catfish wrestler.
Well, suddenly an option is looming on the horizon. And I don't mean Al Gore (though he's a world-class loomer). First of all, I don't think Nobel Prizes should go to people I was seated next to at the Emmys. Second, winning the Nobel Prize does not automatically qualify you to be commander in chief. I think George Bush has proved definitively that to be president, you don't need to care about science, literature or peace.
While my hat is not presently in the ring, I should also point out that it is not on my head. So where's that hat? (Hint: John McCain was seen passing one at a gas station to fuel up the Straight Talk Express.)
Others point to my new bestseller, "I Am America (And So Can You!)" noting that many candidates test the waters with a book first. Just look at Barack Obama, John Edwards or O. J. Simpson.
Look at the moral guidance I offer. On faith: "After Jesus was born, the Old Testament basically became a way for Bible publishers to keep their word count up." On gender: "The sooner we accept the basic differences between men and women, the sooner we can stop arguing about it and start having sex." On race: "While skin and race are often synonymous, skin cleansing is good, race cleansing is bad." On the elderly: "They look like lizards."
Our nation is at a Fork in the Road. Some say we should go Left; some say go Right. I say, "Doesn't this thing have a reverse gear?" Let's back this country up to a time before there were forks in the road - or even roads. Or forks, for that matter. I want to return to a simpler America where we ate our meat off the end of a sharpened stick.
Let me regurgitate: I know why you want me to run, and I hear your clamor. I share Americans' nostalgia for an era when you not only could tell a man by the cut of his jib, but the jib industry hadn't yet fled to Guangdong. And I don't intend to tease you for weeks the way Newt Gingrich did, saying that if his supporters raised $30 million, he would run for president. I would run for 15 million. Cash.
Nevertheless, I am not ready to announce yet - even though it's clear that the voters are desperate for a white, male, middle-aged, Jesus-trumpeting alternative.
What do I offer? Hope for the common man. Because I am not the Anointed or the Inevitable. I am just an Average Joe like you - if you have a TV show.
jenks - 10/17/07 13:52
[the onion is my only news source. I don't even know who fred thompson is. I just knew I'd seen his name yesterday.]
[the onion is my only news source. I don't even know who fred thompson is. I just knew I'd seen his name yesterday.]
joshua - 10/17/07 13:17
Well, that IS the onion, which I appreciate. But the thing is that its probably true, with all due respect to Jackie O. I had heard of certain media outlets allowing articles to be printed calling her a "trophy wife."
Well, that IS the onion, which I appreciate. But the thing is that its probably true, with all due respect to Jackie O. I had heard of certain media outlets allowing articles to be printed calling her a "trophy wife."
jenks - 10/17/07 12:25
speaking of Fred Thompson-
"If Elected, I Will Have The Hottest First Lady In U.S. History
BY SEN. FRED THOMPSON
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE"
:::link:::
speaking of Fred Thompson-
"If Elected, I Will Have The Hottest First Lady In U.S. History
BY SEN. FRED THOMPSON
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE"
:::link:::
joshua - 10/16/07 22:11
Mitt Romney saved up a great joke for the MSNBC debate. He claimed that the debate was like an episode of Law and Order; its a huge cast, the series seems to go on forever, and Fred Thompson shows up at the end. Bada bing.
Mitt Romney saved up a great joke for the MSNBC debate. He claimed that the debate was like an episode of Law and Order; its a huge cast, the series seems to go on forever, and Fred Thompson shows up at the end. Bada bing.
james - 10/16/07 18:16
ya, I don't see either Dowd or Coulter as journalists. They are both entertainers who use the news or political situations as material. Shock Value isn't a good trait in a journalist, yellow journalism is for the dogs. But shock value is a fantastic trait in an entertainer. Now if only Sarah Silverman could replace Paul Harvey on the radio!
Colbert is great. I just wonder how long his show would last in a world without the Bush administration and FOX news. He would find a niche, but his character is so site specific, if I can bastardize that term.
What I find amusing about shows like the Daily Show and Colbert is that they report the news so well because it is so absurd. If major news outlets still had integrity and politicians couldn't so blatantly lie to us and have the media swallow it there would be no humor in the Daily Show and Colbert.
ya, I don't see either Dowd or Coulter as journalists. They are both entertainers who use the news or political situations as material. Shock Value isn't a good trait in a journalist, yellow journalism is for the dogs. But shock value is a fantastic trait in an entertainer. Now if only Sarah Silverman could replace Paul Harvey on the radio!
Colbert is great. I just wonder how long his show would last in a world without the Bush administration and FOX news. He would find a niche, but his character is so site specific, if I can bastardize that term.
What I find amusing about shows like the Daily Show and Colbert is that they report the news so well because it is so absurd. If major news outlets still had integrity and politicians couldn't so blatantly lie to us and have the media swallow it there would be no humor in the Daily Show and Colbert.
joshua - 10/16/07 16:21
I suppose from that standpoint I can see how people would like her, and Ann Coulter for that matter. I've never realy felt compelled to defend Ann Coulter since I don't see anyone but her to blame for her own bad reputation. For me "shock value" isn't necessarily a good trait for journalists that take themselves far too seriously, but hey. Whatever. Diff'rent Strokes.
Colbert is definitely funnier than Jon Leibovitz if you ask me. I think his show outshines The Daily Show all day long, although I have to admit that I'm not a regular viewer of either show... I've only seen each show a couple dozen times.
I suppose from that standpoint I can see how people would like her, and Ann Coulter for that matter. I've never realy felt compelled to defend Ann Coulter since I don't see anyone but her to blame for her own bad reputation. For me "shock value" isn't necessarily a good trait for journalists that take themselves far too seriously, but hey. Whatever. Diff'rent Strokes.
Colbert is definitely funnier than Jon Leibovitz if you ask me. I think his show outshines The Daily Show all day long, although I have to admit that I'm not a regular viewer of either show... I've only seen each show a couple dozen times.
james - 10/16/07 15:11
Tiny: That is the highest of compliments. Thank you
Felly: he is a veritable fountain of truth
Jason: I bust a gut on that line too
Joshua: I love Maureen Dowd. She writes such easily digestible fluff and snark that it just makes me giggle. She is an entertainer, much like Ms. Coulter.
I don't read slate regularly, only when a name I like writes something for them. So I have no idea.
Tiny: That is the highest of compliments. Thank you
Felly: he is a veritable fountain of truth
Jason: I bust a gut on that line too
Joshua: I love Maureen Dowd. She writes such easily digestible fluff and snark that it just makes me giggle. She is an entertainer, much like Ms. Coulter.
I don't read slate regularly, only when a name I like writes something for them. So I have no idea.
joshua - 10/16/07 10:43
Steven Colbert is freaking hilarious. Gore a "world class loomer?" Ha! Maureen Dowd, however, is not. She is a liberal Ann Coulter but worse.
There is a writer on Slate or somewhere... I can't remember her name exactly but I thought it was Puglia. Her articles are interesting because as a liberal other liberals hate her. Maybe you are familiar with who I'm talking about.
Steven Colbert is freaking hilarious. Gore a "world class loomer?" Ha! Maureen Dowd, however, is not. She is a liberal Ann Coulter but worse.
There is a writer on Slate or somewhere... I can't remember her name exactly but I thought it was Puglia. Her articles are interesting because as a liberal other liberals hate her. Maybe you are familiar with who I'm talking about.
fellyconnelly - 10/15/07 22:56
old people do look like lizards don't they? oh mr. colbert.... how true.. how very true...
old people do look like lizards don't they? oh mr. colbert.... how true.. how very true...
tinypliny - 10/15/07 20:00
He writes like you do!
He writes like you do!
" It is tough for a guy who fawns over idealized body shapes a women could only possess with the aid of a colostomy bag."
Hahaha
Jbeaty: to my knowledge all returns were donated to sumo wrestlers still in internment camps
Felly: The chevalier is all disapointment. From an uncomfortable paunch to the slurpy 'boing' of it popping out. Ick
Peter: Oh ya, it is a man's world with sexy wife in bed, sexy secretary at your side and a phone sex operator standing by.
Lauren: The intestines were removed and turned into the straps holding on the "stay-free" looking model.
Ewww did anyone else see those waists?! That is not humanly possible without a fair amount of torture.
I love that picture if I'm saying it right there is so much subtext in it. First of all the wife is fast asleep as the well dressed man is working with the seceratry who is a lot hotter then the wife and is showing off her body. The guy could just slide right out and they could go to a Jazz Club together. Or maybe I'm just reading into it to much. That being said I didn't know they made a male version of a corset. Corsets are so hot even when just worn on the outside of clothes. It isn't even all about the shape it is also how they look and the leather and what they do to the boobs. Ok I'll stop there and just say interesting post.
oh wow... i'm a bit hot and bothered after this post... oh the sexy sexy ladies with their girdled and internally damaged insides!
seriously - am i the only one who thinks about how dissapointed someone is going to be when that chevalier comes off and the 'bulging bay window' comes flyin at them?
What scares me most about the chevalier is there is a free trial offer. So what did they do with all the returns?