And I’m back, just in time to ruin your day! (triggering stuff after cut) Read the rest of this entry »
Archive for the ‘General grumpiness’ Category
Posted by Richie on November 25, 2008
Posted by Richie on September 22, 2008
Look, try and see things from my point of view: I’d spent the last fortnight writing a fifty-seven-page budget for a class assignment – they didn’t mention “an entire semester dedicated to the frustration-riddled vagaries of accounting” during the open day, for some reason – and had had almost no contact with the outside world, especially the parts where I might see movie trailers. So, when class ended on Friday afternoon and somebody asked “Hey, do you want to see Step Brothers?”, I agreed without knowing what it was actually about. You at least know what you’re getting into with Robo Vampire – well, sort of – but for all I knew Step Brothers was a gritty coming-of-age story about a disintegrating family in Salford. By the time I saw the poster, I was in Ferrell stepped in so far that, should I wade no more, returning were as tedious as sitting through the sodding thing. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Richie on September 1, 2008
Mr Film Studies explains female characters in post-war cinema:
“Women had a short-lived independence during World War 2, while the men were away fighting. But when the men came back, they lost their independence and they were expected to be subservient again. Of course, it’s not an issue these days”.
The crowd murmured, if only slightly. In keeping with the student body’s standards [see previous post], they were probably agreeing.
Posted by Richie on July 17, 2008
“It’s a sad day for male feminists” specifically laments some dude over at Feministing, and non-specifically lament various other dudes I’m also not linking to. Never mind that a woman’s been sexually assaulted by a rape crisis counsellor with the keys to her bedroom, we have important stuff to deal with!
* * *
BRUTISH, STUBBLE-ENCRUSTED KYLE PAYNE FAQ FOR MEN
1. Will Kyle Payne make it harder for male allies to be taken seriously?
Since men are by default taken more seriously than women on all subjects up to and including menstruation, it’s unlikely to have a measurable impact on your life. Your concern for the victim is touching, by the way.
2. Will ignoring the victim in favour of droning on about how difficult this has made my life make it harder for male allies to be taken seriously?
Depends on who you’re trying to impress.
3. Being expected to prove my credentials and earn people’s trust vs. A widespread sense of betrayal and insecurity. Which is worse?
Take an intelligence test on 1D20.
4. Other than the obvious stuff about how hard our lives are, what can men learn from this?
That there’s a reason you’re held to a certain standard. It’s not even a very high one, for fuck’s sake, and it’s gotten even lower since Creek Running North shut down. Again, a rapist managed to work as a rape crisis counsellor. I think that might be the more pressing issue here, yes?
* * *
I’m predicting that Kyle Payne becomes the Warren Farrel of 2030. “Before his involvement with the Fathers’ Rights Movement, Kyle Payne served a women’s rights advocate, social justice educator, writer and activist. He now dedicates his time to challenging the bias against men in the American legal system…”
Posted by Richie on June 21, 2008
Week 1: End of semester workload crisis; Week 2: Girlfriend gets horribly sick; Week 3: Looking for new flat. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Richie on May 12, 2008
Posted by Richie on May 8, 2008
Today in class we got to cast our very own hypothetical film! The premise of said hypothetical film, as dictated by the woman in charge of the exercise: ‘A man has been accused of molesting a woman at work, but he says he didn’t do it’. Volunteers from the class then assembled their own dream casts from a pile of right classy 8 x 12 headshots, requiring: The Man, His Wife, The Victim (Or Is She?). Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Richie on May 4, 2008
Yes, of course I did. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Richie on April 8, 2008
Apparently gender differences are innate and immutable because male rhesus monkeys prefer playing with toy trucks, while female rhesus monkeys prefer playing with dolls. Checking out the relevant New Scientist article in question – It’s online – we find that what actually happened is that the male monkeys preferred to play with toys that had wheels, while female monkeys played with plush toys and toys that had wheels. So… the actual bone-headed literalist reading of the results is that females are more adaptable, more curious and faster learners, while males are narrow-minded and just like watching things go ’round and ’round all day long. As somebody with aversion to bone-headed literalism and no interest in toy trucks (I did build a model APC last night, but that’s different because it’s more expensive), I’m obviously not going to take this interpretation seriously either, but can’t people at least be consistent in their idiocy…?
But no, we focus almost exclusively on the habits of the male monkeys simply because they’re the least challenging. Just so we know that the article’s got an agenda, we’re told that the boys-love-trucks conclusion “may upset those psychologists who insist that sex differences depend on social factors”. You know, those psychologists who insist on things, since there are only two kinds of psychologists in the world; the sane ones who pay attention to proper scientific research, and the crazy ones who hang around outside the supermarket shouting at strangers and trying to flog their theses for gold coin donations. And by ignoring everything the female monkeys did we’re able to make the leap from “male monkeys liked played with toys that had wheels, rather than dolls” to “all gender stereotypes are actually innate parts of primate nature”. When we do hear about female monkeys, it’s one line in paragraph three, and – ‘pon my soul! – it contradicts their conclusion. Imagine if they’d done it with bonobos. Or giant squid.
Before I leave for class… playing with wheeled toys is apparently part of primate nature. Can you see the problem, here?
I’m assuming somebody was paid for this.
Posted by Richie on March 14, 2008
Metlink’s latest advertising campaign, running from Sunday 24 February, reminds us that the universe is always watching and is ready to exact retribution if you cheat the public transport system. The quirky and humorous advertisements appear in newspapers, on radio, online, and around the public transport network. They show how bad luck can strike fare evaders in return for their actions.