It's always disappointing when you meet someone you admired and they turn out to be a total asshole. I was slightly bummed when I finally got to meet my baseball crush, Danny Graves at RedsFest 2001. Granted, it's not the most fun a professional baseball player can have (I don't think I want to know the details of the most fun a professional baseball player can have). And I'm fairly certain that since he was married, he was not going to fall in love with me at first sight. But the fact that I had to beg him to sign an autograph for an elderly woman in a wheelchair, it took a little luster off him.
One of my favorite comics is the comic at nataliedee.com. Natalie and her husband Drew each create a comic each day, as well as one they collaborate on. I've been a fan since Sara introduced them to me when I was working at C+RA. Her blog was funny, and her advice, while a little harsh, was usually spot on. However, I was slightly bothered by the tagline on the internet header- Natalie Dee: "America's Favorite Cracker." For those folk who do not know the origin of the slur cracker (and I didn't until not too long ago), it has nothing to do with the fact that snack crackers are white and flaky. It actually refers to cracking the whip- on slaves. So it's really just as derogatory to blacks as it is to whites. It had bothered me for some time, and this morning, I finally decided to email Natalie and make sure she was aware of the slur's origin. I prefaced by saying what a big fan I was.
Her response made my disappointment with Danny appear like a dream come true. She began with a lecture as to the literary device of using tongue-in-cheek language, and even included a link to the Wikipedia site on tongue-in-cheek (because Wikipedia is the ultimate authority). Then she "thanked" me because the internet might have thought she was a slavemaster herself. I would have liked to include a verbatim reproduction of the exchange, but I couldn't get express written consent as advised in her e-mail disclaimer. I know what you're thinking- the enforcement of binding email disclaimers is basically nonexistent. In trying to be a decent person, I asked for her permission to reproduce it anyway. She replied no, and insinuated that the entire intention of my email was to reproduce some criticism on my blog (with my millions of readers, I know). I didn't really consider it until I got the most pretentious response to a letter that was nothing but respectful and appreciative. But, since I'm not a complete asshole (although I am an asshole), I will respect her wishes, despite her lack of respect for me. However, I will include the original email I sent to her and you can determine for yourself whether her tutorial on literary devices (if you can call the definition of tongue-in-cheek a literary device) and her admonishment regarding my reproduction was warranted. Enjoy:
Dear Natalie,
I would like to start off by saying I am a huge fan. My friend introduced me to your comics (as well as Drew's) over a year ago, and the first day I read every single one that had been posted, and have visited the site every day since. I am looking forward to the store re-opening now that I have a little disposable income to spend on it.
I had noticed that the new tagline on your site title is "America's Favorite Cracker." I am not sure the significance behind that choice- I'd be happy to be enlightened. However, I had learned a few months ago the origin of the slang term cracker for white people. I had always thought it was because crackers (especially saltines) were white and flaky. Unfortunately, I was wrong. It actually refers to slave masters (cracking a whip). So it's not really a nice thing for white people or black people. Since I (and most people I know) did not know the negative connotations that were involved in the term, I thought maybe you were not aware either.
I apologize if I'm overstepping my bounds as a fan- I just want to make sure that as many people can enjoy Natalie Dee like I do.
Thanks for your humor and making me feel like there is someone with the same crazy sense of humor as I have.
Have a great day,
Dale
There you have it, kids... perhaps I am being overly sensitive. But maybe that sensitivity allows me to acknowledge that being a total asshole is not always necessary.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
let's talk about sex
Before I launch into my latest rambling- I just realized that most of my post titles are from music. For those of you who have may have already noticed, it has been unintentional until now, and I feel a bit of pressure to decide if I should maintain the music theme or just forget it. I think WAY too much.
People make a big stink about marriage nowadays. The legalization of gay marriage in California, the criminalization of gay marriage in Ohio, half of marriages ending in divorce, Britney Spears marrying men seemingly at random. And as I take note of some of the media being thrown our way, it's no wonder everyone's fucked up.
There's a Coors Light commercial that I absolutely hate. There is a couple sitting on a sofa when the male gets a phone call, listens and then turns to the female and says, "It's Joe...he really needs to... vent." And she replies, "you should go." Dude leaves and arrives at Joe's apartment, "ready to vent?" and holds up a case of Coors Light, "ready to vent!" Joe replies. Flash forward to Joe, 2 other guys, and Dude on the phone, with the girl saying "is he going to be okay?" and Dude replying, "I think we might be venting a little longer." Hangs up phone, and guys all cheer some sporting play.
This commercial is encouraging the notion that married/attached men will only be "allowed" to hang out with their buddies if he makes up a story indicating that they will be emoting and not having any fun at all. The problem is, a lot of women will insist on that- no having fun without me! I'm the only one capable of bringing fun into your life! Any time you are having fun without me lessens my self-worth, because I'm only as important as a man makes me to be! Ugh... an endless cycle of whining women and scheming men.
Cosmopolitan magazine- the clearest indication of the coming apocalypse besides George W. getting elected TWICE- recently ran a feature (they are called features because stories would involve both paragraphs and thoughts) about how to spy on your man (a horrible term for someone with whom you have a relationship). It detailed where you should look (including his medicine cabinet, trash, glove box, mail, cell phone, gym bag and laundry) if you think he might be keeping something from you. If you are going through dirty socks and coffee grounds, you have far bigger problems than a potentially unfaithful boyfriend. For instance, you are clinically insane. When I read Cosmo, I can almost hear the relationships ending. When I wonder to myself why I don't have some kick-ass boyfriend (being as I'm a kick-ass chick) and why there are so many cool guys with some crazy-ass women... I realize that Cosmo has catalyzed this notion that men are incurable horndogs and women are psychos. Which to an extent is true, but they are not helping the situation.
There was a guy on The Colbert Report the other day talking about how men are not by nature monogamous. Well, duh. And that men like Eliot Spitzer should be empathized with and understood as just being male. I know- boning hookers is Spitz's cross to bear... tough life. Here's the thing: whenever I hear someone say that people are not inherently monogamous, I think, of course not. That's the point of monogamy. There's a great line in the movie A League of Their Own when Tom Hanks is talking to Geena Davis. Davis wants to quit playing baseball, and says it's too hard. Hanks says- "Of course it's hard. If it was easy, everyone would do it. The hard is what makes it great." It's kind of how I feel about monogamy. If it was easy for you to be committed to one person and avoid acting on temptation- well, then, what's the point? The idea is that you make a commitment, you override the reptilian part of your brain that wants only to mate, preferably with someone who has admirable plumage. That's what is supposed to make us just a little bit more civilized than the other animals on this planet. That, and our ability to kill fellow members of our species for shits and giggles and oil.
On the other hand, I once went to a mega-church that made me feel so far from God, I thought I was in a level of hell even Dante couldn't imagine. I happened to make my one visit on the first day of a lecture series on Love & Sex. Lucky me- I was more concerned with Jobs & Money at the time. The beginning of the... service? show? whatever... was an interview with a comically costumed Satan. He was being asked his view on the various issues, or at least variations, of sex. (I don't know if In the Devil's Studio was a regular installment at this church, as I have never returned). By way of some clever reverse psychology, it was implied that God is NOT in favor of homosexuality, premarital sex, oral sex, or masturbation. During the service, and for about three weeks after, I was too disturbed to be able to analyze the whole thing. But now, in later reflection, I wondered what kind of release was acceptable for sexual tension. Here's my hunch- dry humping. They didn't say ANYTHING about dry-humping. I've got to figure that typical pre-service conversations go somewhere along the lines of "I'm going to grab a coffee, want to dry hump after church?" I won't even go into the fact that the worship leader (they are called that because I think you have to go school to be a minister) said that the passion and ecstasy that we feel when we have sex (and while he didn't say it, I'm assuming he includes orgasms in that passion and ecstasy... Satan didn't say anything about orgasms, so I hope they are okay) is the same passion that God feels for us. Which is unsettling. I like God. I could even consider myself to love him. But God feeling sexual ecstasy for me makes me think that maybe that's what the Catholic priests tell themselves when they are manhandling little boys. Ew.
Here's the thing- we all like sex. We all look at sexy people and think, "YUM!" Women are no less likely to want to bone random guys (Cristiano Ronaldo- I'm looking at you) and men are no less capable of monogamy. And God loves you no matter how you like to bone, however, I think he would definitely rather you not manhandle the children. And Dude, just go drink beer with your friends... then Chick can go shake her ass at a dance club and get free drinks from men having mid-life crises.
However- no glove, no love, kids... STDs can really wreck a mood.
People make a big stink about marriage nowadays. The legalization of gay marriage in California, the criminalization of gay marriage in Ohio, half of marriages ending in divorce, Britney Spears marrying men seemingly at random. And as I take note of some of the media being thrown our way, it's no wonder everyone's fucked up.
There's a Coors Light commercial that I absolutely hate. There is a couple sitting on a sofa when the male gets a phone call, listens and then turns to the female and says, "It's Joe...he really needs to... vent." And she replies, "you should go." Dude leaves and arrives at Joe's apartment, "ready to vent?" and holds up a case of Coors Light, "ready to vent!" Joe replies. Flash forward to Joe, 2 other guys, and Dude on the phone, with the girl saying "is he going to be okay?" and Dude replying, "I think we might be venting a little longer." Hangs up phone, and guys all cheer some sporting play.
This commercial is encouraging the notion that married/attached men will only be "allowed" to hang out with their buddies if he makes up a story indicating that they will be emoting and not having any fun at all. The problem is, a lot of women will insist on that- no having fun without me! I'm the only one capable of bringing fun into your life! Any time you are having fun without me lessens my self-worth, because I'm only as important as a man makes me to be! Ugh... an endless cycle of whining women and scheming men.
Cosmopolitan magazine- the clearest indication of the coming apocalypse besides George W. getting elected TWICE- recently ran a feature (they are called features because stories would involve both paragraphs and thoughts) about how to spy on your man (a horrible term for someone with whom you have a relationship). It detailed where you should look (including his medicine cabinet, trash, glove box, mail, cell phone, gym bag and laundry) if you think he might be keeping something from you. If you are going through dirty socks and coffee grounds, you have far bigger problems than a potentially unfaithful boyfriend. For instance, you are clinically insane. When I read Cosmo, I can almost hear the relationships ending. When I wonder to myself why I don't have some kick-ass boyfriend (being as I'm a kick-ass chick) and why there are so many cool guys with some crazy-ass women... I realize that Cosmo has catalyzed this notion that men are incurable horndogs and women are psychos. Which to an extent is true, but they are not helping the situation.
There was a guy on The Colbert Report the other day talking about how men are not by nature monogamous. Well, duh. And that men like Eliot Spitzer should be empathized with and understood as just being male. I know- boning hookers is Spitz's cross to bear... tough life. Here's the thing: whenever I hear someone say that people are not inherently monogamous, I think, of course not. That's the point of monogamy. There's a great line in the movie A League of Their Own when Tom Hanks is talking to Geena Davis. Davis wants to quit playing baseball, and says it's too hard. Hanks says- "Of course it's hard. If it was easy, everyone would do it. The hard is what makes it great." It's kind of how I feel about monogamy. If it was easy for you to be committed to one person and avoid acting on temptation- well, then, what's the point? The idea is that you make a commitment, you override the reptilian part of your brain that wants only to mate, preferably with someone who has admirable plumage. That's what is supposed to make us just a little bit more civilized than the other animals on this planet. That, and our ability to kill fellow members of our species for shits and giggles and oil.
On the other hand, I once went to a mega-church that made me feel so far from God, I thought I was in a level of hell even Dante couldn't imagine. I happened to make my one visit on the first day of a lecture series on Love & Sex. Lucky me- I was more concerned with Jobs & Money at the time. The beginning of the... service? show? whatever... was an interview with a comically costumed Satan. He was being asked his view on the various issues, or at least variations, of sex. (I don't know if In the Devil's Studio was a regular installment at this church, as I have never returned). By way of some clever reverse psychology, it was implied that God is NOT in favor of homosexuality, premarital sex, oral sex, or masturbation. During the service, and for about three weeks after, I was too disturbed to be able to analyze the whole thing. But now, in later reflection, I wondered what kind of release was acceptable for sexual tension. Here's my hunch- dry humping. They didn't say ANYTHING about dry-humping. I've got to figure that typical pre-service conversations go somewhere along the lines of "I'm going to grab a coffee, want to dry hump after church?" I won't even go into the fact that the worship leader (they are called that because I think you have to go school to be a minister) said that the passion and ecstasy that we feel when we have sex (and while he didn't say it, I'm assuming he includes orgasms in that passion and ecstasy... Satan didn't say anything about orgasms, so I hope they are okay) is the same passion that God feels for us. Which is unsettling. I like God. I could even consider myself to love him. But God feeling sexual ecstasy for me makes me think that maybe that's what the Catholic priests tell themselves when they are manhandling little boys. Ew.
Here's the thing- we all like sex. We all look at sexy people and think, "YUM!" Women are no less likely to want to bone random guys (Cristiano Ronaldo- I'm looking at you) and men are no less capable of monogamy. And God loves you no matter how you like to bone, however, I think he would definitely rather you not manhandle the children. And Dude, just go drink beer with your friends... then Chick can go shake her ass at a dance club and get free drinks from men having mid-life crises.
However- no glove, no love, kids... STDs can really wreck a mood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
