dez_chan

I was online shopping (like you do) to see if I could find a shrug to go with some dresses I have. If you're a woman and you've been to a store in the last six months, these fucking things were unavoidable. NOT TODAY, I couldn't find shit in meatspace. What I could find was the wrong size, hideous, too expensive or all three.

So I went to Old Navy online, and they've got some in clearance for $10 or less. Great! I put one in my cart and browse around for pants. I actually like their perfect khakis; they're soft and wide legged enough for me, and the stance isn't too low and they have them in short (hallelujah!). But! I'd happened to be browsing in the plus section. And lo and behold, they're a different fucking price.

Old Navy's straight sizes go up to a size fucking 20. Not only can't you get the "women's plus" line in stores ("online exclusive" is code for "fat girl ghetto" or "we don't want your big ass in our store, but give us your cash anyway"), but you pay extra for the "privilege" of having something (a very limited amount of something, I might add) in your size. Which is available in straight size for less. Also, you pay to return merchandise.

Sorry fuckers, I'm not paying you extra just because you put "plus" on the label. Suck it.

I think Lea Michele is sending the wrong message. She plays such a ‘good girl' on ‘Glee' and a lot of kids look up to her persona.

Name. ONE.

Most of what Lea says in interviews is unbelievably PG when compared to other stars her age, so basically the issue at hand is just what she chooses to wear.

Orrrrrrrrrr...what the stylist chooses for her to wear. 'Cause magazines. They kinda work like that.

Like most actresses who star in shows popular with the kiddies, Lea has to toe the line between being a alluring-yet-virginal high schooler and an adult woman in control of her sexuality.

There, fixed that for you!

You can be sexy without looking ridiculous, and she just looks ridiculous. It's not genuine. Lea Michele may be an adult, but to pretend that she doesn't know her fans are 11 is just ignorance. Why take the risk that even one teenager will get the wrong message of from her idol?

Oh Fox News. You're so very clueless on every single solitary issue ever. I don't know an 11-year-old who watches this show. High School Musical? Yes. Hannah Montana? Maybe. Most of Glee's fans aren't middle schoolers, who wouldn't care about it in the first place.

Besides, she's the least worrisome role model (and oh, how I HATE that term) on TV currently. Guess what, if you're that worried that your kids will emulate Lea Michele, you might want to think for a half second about oh...everything else they've ever seen. Which by 11 in this day and age is a fuckton of porn with no responsible context for it.

But that would require interacting with your children like they were people and not Fabergé eggs.

Sometimes I get these ideas that simply won't leave until I do something about it. Like I laid down to sleep and all of the sudden by brain goes:

"Hey, what do you think happened to those taped performances Ms. _____ had in her classroom of all the drama performances?"

"I dunno, depends on if they were hers personally, or if the school considers them theirs."

"If they're still around, they should be converted into a digital format."

"Yup, they sure should."

"We should do this."

"...Really? I know fuck all about converting VHS to digital copy."

"We could ask the TComm lab people. Then we could have a digital library. Surely someone sometime in the future will be morbidly curious and want to see these. Go email someone at your old high school and ask."

"Self, it's like 12:30 at night, can we not do this in the morning?"

"NO. DO IT NOW."

Siiiiiigh.

"Mr. President, thank you," said Biden, addressing a hypothetical Bush. "I've known you for all eight years of your presidency, and I've never known a time when you didn't care."

Asked whether Bush deserves credit for the end of combat operations, Biden said earnestly, "You deserve a lot of credit."

Thank you? THANK YOU?!

Here, I wanna thank him too: Dear FORMER (thank god!) President Bush,

Thanks for demeaning women.
Thanks for infringing on my rights as a person.
Thanks for infringing on my right to privacy.
Thanks for skull-fucking the economy right at the time when I most needed a fucking job.
Thanks for regressive social policies that prevent me from ever getting out of this fucking nightmare life that I'm currently struggling to maintain.
Thanks for condoning (and enforcing) extremely regressive medical protocols that enable my doctors to view me as nothing more than a sperm receptacle and "potential mother."
Thanks for getting us into a war with a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the only terrorist attack ever on mainland America. Thanks for continuing that war for no conceivable reason.
Thanks for ridiculous fucking foreign policy decisions that ensure that we are viewed as negatively as possible worldwide.
Thanks for backing false dichotomies ("These are REAL AMERICANS!!! IN THE HEARTLAND! WHO AGREE WITH ME!") and thus making any political dissenters "on the side of the terrorists."
Thanks for encouraging ignorance on a grand scale, ensuring that the next generation is as ill-informed as possible.
Thanks for financially backing programs that very plainly don't work (read: abstinence only education) and ignoring programs that do (read: comprehensive sex ed), thus guaranteeing our place as the number one First World nation in abortions and STDs.
Thanks for firing anyone who gave you a realistic POV rather than a ra-ra-cheerleader for your horrible fucking mistakes in judgment. You wanted optimists; and boy did you need them when the economy went to shit, and the housing market went to shit, and the banks went bankrupt, etc.
Thanks for taking the first budget surplus we'd ever had as a nation in decades and reducing us to trillions of dollars in debt in just a few short months.

You know, maybe y'all have something to thank him for. Feel free to add anything I might've missed.

I reserved a couple cookbooks from the library on the subject of food for weight loss and health. I saw some lovely ones at the Borders when we were down there last time, but I don't want to spend $30 on a cookbook. I end up using such a small fraction of a cookbook that my upper limit is pretty much $10. Most recipes you can find online anyway. In this instance, I wanted a couple ideas, see if they had any hints.

They didn't.

And these books are terrible.

The American Heart Association Healthy Family Meals book...I found not a single recipe I'd use in here. And it uses one of my number one pet peeves associated with food books: The unnecessary quote.

Meat "Loaf" with Hidden Vegetables. Super "Sundae" Breakfast Parfaits. Meat Loaf "Mud Pies." UGHUGHUGH. I read them every time as scare quotes. Like, what is it if it's not a loaf? What exactly is a "loaf"? I'm sure I don't want any.

The second book is Cooking Thin With Chef Kathleen. Pet peeve number two (in this post): Chef Kathleen. You know, that's a title that other people give you, it's supremely egomaniacal to call yourself that. Real chefs don't need to put that in there in their own books. I'm pretty sure if Thomas Keller doesn't insist on being called "CHEF THOMAS KELLER" on the front of the French Laundry Cookbook, then you should maybe settle the fuck down.

Continuing with the many sins this book commits, the first 80 pages are devoted not to recipes or basics and tips, but as a giant screed against fatties, 'cause the author is formerly fat herself. Oh the self-loathing weight loss guru, how I despise you. Yeah, guess what, I don't need to be told that if I ate less Ho-hos I'd be slimmer (ignoring the fact that my lifetime total of Ho-hos eaten is very very small).

And the final two nails in the coffin of effectivity in this book? The "From Mom's Lips To Your Ears" sidebar. "Try Everything Once." "Eat More Vegetables." For fuck's sake, really? And finally, and MOST ANNOYING the (ugh) "Guyometer," a gauge of whether your husband will like any given menu item (example: Oven Roasted Carrots and Parsnips - Guyometer: Ding, ding, ding, off-the-charts great--for a vegetable. Rainy's Sweet Potatoes - Guyometer: It's not steak but as far as vegetables go, this is pretty good).

First off, how annoyingly sexist. Secondly, how fucking hetero-centric. Third, how presumptuous. FAIL FAIL FAIL.

This book isn't quite as useless as the previous one (I lifted three whole recipes out of 200, so...), but I'm failing to see how any of the food in this book qualifies as weight-loss fare. It's all stuff I already cook. There's been no attempt that I can see to "lighten" any of the meals (it's got a recipe for ribs. There is absolutely NO WAY you can make ribs low fat or healthy. NONE). It offers no nutritional information whatsoever. The closest it comes is saying things like, "Save up your calories for this one, it's worth it!" So "Chef" Kathleen's advice for healthier weight loss eating is...don't eat anything else if you're planning on having a supremely fattening dish? Excellent. That's some great fucking advice there, did you get it from your stereotype of a mother or your stereotype of a husband?

So in other words, a complete waste of my time. Ah well, at least I managed to get Virgin: The Untouched History out at the same time as these paperweights.

Title refers to this bit of wank from a few months ago. The comparison becomes clear shortly.

So you remember how I was going to play through all the relationships and endings and whatnot for Dragon Age (note: Not Awakening)? ( I sort of did, and here's how it goes. Spoilers. )

So yeah, the sourcebook thingie. The boyfriend gets these sometimes at work for like a dollar or free or something when they're getting ready to toss them out, so he brought this one home. Oh man, it is the least helpful thing EVER. First of all, it doesn't have an index. Second of all, it doesn't give you locations of things in fetch quests (either in writing or on a map). If it does give you a direction, it's always super vague. It's a guidebook with no advice (I swear to you, verbatim, this is a passage: She'll transform into a dragon. Kill her. (Have fun!) What the shit? Don't give me any tips or anything! Like who to bring or her vulnerabilities!). This is one of the only strategy guides I've ever had where I'll just keep the goddamn Gamefaqs open because I know the book will not help me.

The pictures are pretty, and that's the only good thing I can say about it. Also the drawing on the back looks not unlike a deformed vulva.

So yesterday I was bitching about the flood of shit about Twilight all over my goddamn internet, to the point where even the haters had nothing new or interesting to say (I know, shocking). But this is a thing of beauty:

Congratulations, Twilight: Eclipse. You didn’t manage to suck as much as the first two entries into the franchise. Of course, that’s like wereboning a geriatric with dementia during a rare moment of lucidity. Sure, he remembers your name, but he’s still a wheezy, barely erect sag-ass bag of flesh and bones with old-man balls. But that’s not stopping over half of the critical community from tea-bagging the old fuck. Why? Because the standard set by the first two movies is so low that we’re supposed to feel blessed because the dude put in his dentures, metaphorically speaking, never mind that the teeth marks he left on your back are covered in Polident.

ETA: I just saw someone give a spoiler warning for Van Gogh's death. People, I don't care if it was used as a plot device in a recently aired show; it's not a spoiler if it happened 120 years ago. He also cut off his ear (not in the same year). But the Meiji restoration happened, the Massacre at Wounded Knee killed off a bunch of natives, and Nelly Bly circumnavigated the world. You're all caught up on your 1890 "news."

Man makes half-assed defense of the Star Wars Prequels, is taken to task by fans in the comments.

I always assumed the Jedi were striving toward a Buddhist kind of thing: life without attachments, the end of suffering because of passions*, etc. Then again, I'm less inclined to argue this point on the Internet.

*Those familiar with the EU and KOTOR and whatnot can attest: the Jedi code sounds not unlike the Four Noble Truths?

I may be rewatching the Avengers. And once again, I'm struck by Mrs. Peel's outfits. SO. Enjoy one.

( I learned to screencap, sort of. )

The Most Mismatched Fistfights in Movie History: Ewan MacGregor and Hayden Christensen v. Christopher Lee (I'm especially fond of the reverse in this one). And Jean-Claude Van Damme verses Raul Julia.

BONUS! Nazgul verses labrodoodle.

Normally, I'd let something like this slide, but the site is called "Overthinking It." Where else am I going to be pointlessly pedantic?

Don’t we all agree that in a perfect world, all artists should have unfettered freedom? You don’t want gallery owners telling Picasso how to paint, or concert hall owners telling Mozart how to compose.

UM. Artists work on commission. Do you think Michaelangelo looked at the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and said, "Man, I gotta paint that!" Do you think he did a fuckton of Pietas because it was his secret passion? Musicians/composers had patrons too. Wagner, for instance, composed a lot of pieces for King Ludwig.

Much though it's a fun thought that artists had/have complete freedom to do whatever projects they like in whatever medium they like and so on, that wasn't the reality for a lot of famous artists.

( The Madonna episode and another article, spoilers obvs )

So some of you have heard the latest internet kerfluffle over Roger Ebert being a presumptuous twatbag and declaring that video games aren't art. Any well executed game is not art, according to this ultimate arbiter of what is and is not art, because of the medium of video games. Therefore, my shitting on a piece of paper is more art than a video game that took 5 years and 200 people to complete work on, because paper is a recognized artistic medium.

I'd go on more in this vein, but this sums it up far more eloquently than I can.

I’m not trying to reduce the argument to the absurd and just say that everything is art, but to insist that to judge art on its delivery mechanism is as patently absurd as judging your dinner on whether it’s on a plate or in a bowl.

YES.

I'm on my second "read" of this, and remembered I hadn't cross posted this on my initial read. D'oh!

( EXTREME SPOILER WARNING FOR THE LATEST DRESDEN BOOK, 'CHANGES'. DO NOT CLICK IF YOU DIDN'T READ IT YET!!! )

marriedtothesea.com

From here:

In fact some of the most ardent LOTR fans that I've ever come across have been women.

'Kay, I'm not gonna argue that; me too.

Take my aunt for instance: she reads LOTR from cover to cover every single year, and has been doing so for as long as any of us can remember.

Okay, maybe I'm a bitch, but this doesn't seem that impressive to me. I re-read things constantly. I re-read all of the Dresden Files (Fool Moon excluded) a couple times a year. Twelve books worth, twice a year (or the Kushiel books; six books, some in the 900 page long range, a couple times a year, when I get bored). I don't brag about this, because who the fuck cares? It's not an accomplishment for me to read or re-read. I'm a literate adult, it's what I do.

Tolkien might not have had much time for women as some have claimed,

"Some have claimed". Or you know, he said outright. Pesky details like that. Like how he tried to prevent women from studying at Oxford, or belittled female scholars at the time (this was when mixed gender intellectual salons were actually quite popular, so you can't entirely blame, "Oh it was the olden days." There's quite an element of choice and perspective here).

Am I saying women can't or don't like LOTR? No. But I'm not saying any of these "facts" makes it more feminist or positive. Reality is troublesome like that.

ETA: For perspective, the Dresden Files books I regularly re-read equal out to 4136 pages (4584 now that Changes is out). The Kushiel books that I re-read equal out to 2395 pages. LOTR equals out to 1498.

A 12-year-old Yemeni bride died of internal bleeding following intercourse three days after she was married off to an older man, the United Nations Children's Fund said.

"Intercourse." What a polite little euphemism for "spousal rape" or "child rape." "Intercourse." Sounds safe and scientific, doesn't it?

And then there's the latest in the Catholic Church rape clusterfuck.

This court, although it regards the arguments presented in favour of removal in this case to be of grave significance, nevertheless deems it necessary to consider the good of the Universal Church together with that of the petitioner, and it is also unable to make light of the detriment that granting the dispensation can provoke with the community of Christ's faithful, particularly regarding the young age of the petitioner.

The petitioner in this case being the priest and not the children he raped. Because the value of a 38-year-old adult far outweighs that of (in his own words) TONS OF CHILDREN HE RAPED.

Things I Am Sick Of In Fantasy Literature

Passages like this:

She was an ordinary, plain-looking girl from a poor family with a pitiful dowry. She had flaming red hair, and granite gray eyes. She didn't have blue eyes, you see, so she was plainly fucking hideous. She had a small, straight nose, and wide full lips. Her skin was horribly malformed with disfiguring freckles. Also, and most unforgivable, she knew how to read and was over 16, so naturally no one in their right fucking mind would ever marry her, therefore she was useless, and was resigned to a life of solitary spinsterhood forever until she died, alone, surrounded by books and dust. Really, I can't emphasize how plain and unattractive she was. Like Quasimodo or something; believe me! Honest!

Her suitor was a tall, strong handsome man some five years older than her. He had bright green eyes and black hair that was glossy and shiny as a crow's wing. He was also fabulously rich, polite, charming, and listened when she talked. She was NOT AT ALL INTERESTED IN HIM. Not even a little. She couldn't imagine why such a good-looking man would even be talking to her when he could be throwing rocks at her instead.

Please. Stop.

The above is paraphrased from the newest Robin Hobb series. I am not exaggerating much; that is an accurate physical description of both characters.

Not only is this shit tired and cliché, but in a universe that's peopled by REAL MUTANTS (as in, they have scales and wattles and creepy birth defects and claw toes), this kind of nonsense is even more disingenuous than it is in any other fantasy novel. Also, also, I've been given no reason to care about these fucks. Oi; when you start a series in order to bridge some of the continuity between your other series', you might want to try and use some characters I know or care about.

I told the boyfriend I wished I had a meatspace copy of this book so I could throw it across the room. Instead I had to settle for gently (but disdainfully) placing my eReader on the table and giving it a scornful look. Not nearly as satisfying.

Okay, can someone explain to me when talking about shit actually became a no-no? Because seriously, between this and another thing I saw the other day where a "life coach" admonished a group of women to never ask a man for anything, never to persuade him to do anything and to just take whatever he gave you...I'm sure this is why these people are single. It's very simple:

1. Suppressing shit is bad for you. If you suppress your opinions/desires/wants/needs all the time, then you'll just resent the fuck out of the other person in the relationship and it will destroy whatever you might have had.

2. Most people (EVEN MEN!!!) do understand verbal language. Talk to them. It's not as mysterious as just brooding until he figures it out or whatever, but it's a fuck of a lot easier.

3. A relationship where one person gets what they want all the time and the other doesn't isn't healthy or desirable.

4. Yes magazines, we've figured out the "more blowjobs" equation. Yes, yes, every problem can be solved by more blowjobs. Believe it or not, even the stupidest most doormat girl in her first relationship has figured out that if she does more sexual acts that her partner wants, then they'll be in a better mood. What about if your problem isn't, "Not enough sex/I'm too lazy to talk to them and figure out what they're thinking" but something more complicated like, "Why doesn't he care about me when I'm not attached to his penis?" I notice that men's magazines aren't full of this nonsense pandering...gee, I wonder why.

Also, why the fuck does Lady Gaga look like Debbie Harry on that cover? I'm a little weirded out.

So yeah, in the classic style of my brain, it decided after I'd woken up this morning to pee that I needed to remain awake and puzzle out Asian clothing.

Again, it's the steampunk thing. I'm sayin' work needs to call me back, 'cause I need something else to think about.

And I was like, "Why is it all about Victoriana? Why hasn't anyone ever steampunked a kimono or something?" So I went looking, and I came up with a tentative answer (aside from a slightly racist Euro-centrist viewpoint): Asian clothing doesn't change in the same way European clothing did. You look up vintage or 19th century fashion and stick an "Asian" modifier on there and it all gets lumped into one word: TRADITIONAL. Well, we know what traditional Asian garb looks like because people still wear them. Traditional clothing from Iran? Could be sold in the marketplace right now (btw, why is Iran considered Asia? Is it that Central Asian thing, 'cause I always thought it was grouped more with Africa). Same with India, same with China, same with Japan, same with Indonesia (sort of. I could not actually find pictures of the clothing, but rather the cloth).

Antique clothing from our own culture differs enough that when someone puts it on, you can tell it's a costume, not an heirloom. Mostly the difference I could see in vintage verses contemporary clothing in Asia (as seen from images; I'm readily admitting I've spent less than an hour on this) is one of material and intricacy.

Which doesn't help the enterprising costumer much, sadly. But it might help me get back to sleep.