Maybe it's time i renew my aspirations for being on the Supreme Court  


Not because I think I'm qualified from a legal standpoint, nor because I think i have the networking/political skills to get apointed. Rather, I think i could make a good addition by the simple fact that i'm clearly funnier than the current justices.

Here's an article on how "funny" the justices are:

Apparently, some professor counted up how many times a justice got "laughter" in the transcripts of the oral arguments. Then, he looked to see which justice had the most check marks. I'll give the professor credit though, as he admits that his "study" is not perfect in that it doesn't measure the quality of the laughter after each joke. Btw, here's the gem of the article:

The simple notation "[laughter]" does not, moreover, distinguish between "a series of small chuckles" and "a joke that brought the house down." Nor, Professor Wexler said, does it separate "the genuine laughter brought about by truly funny or clever humor and the anxious kind of laughter that arises when one feels nervous or uncomfortable or just plain scared for the nation's future."

Gee, i wonder if the professor is liberal.

Anyway, here is a typical exchange by the wonka wonka justices.

Consider, for instance, the golden opportunity on Halloween this year when a light bulb in the courtroom's ceiling exploded during an argument.

It takes two justices, it turns out, to screw up a light bulb joke.

"It's a trick they play on new chief justices all the time," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who joined the court that month, said of the explosion.


"Happy Halloween," Justice Scalia retorted.


And then, the kicker. "We're even more in the dark now than before," Chief Justice Roberts said.


And finally, i have to include this great description of Justice Ginsburg [ugh, i can't un-italics]

"It is widely believed that Justice Ginsburg doesn't even laugh herself, much less make others laugh," Professor Wexler, a law clerk for her in 1998 and 1999, wrote. "I can attest that she does, in fact, laugh. Maybe not often, perhaps not loudly or with great vigor and the wild waving of arms, but laugh she does."

If only someone I knew watched "House"  


then i could have a nice little discussion over House's character. He's actually very morally sound, at least by his own standards. It annoys me that people whine and yell at him when he doesn't bend his integrity to suit their needs. For example, that "speech" he gave for the new drug in season 1. His devotion to what he believed in was very honorable. Eh, what's the point of discussing this? Nobody reads this blog, and definitely nobody who does watches house.

The best knicks game i've seen in years  


For some reason (maybe b/c their current team is terrible), MSG was showing classic knicks games on xmas eve. They aired a random game from January of 99 (i think. Nelson was the coach, so someone smarter than me can figure out the actual year). Knicks vs. Heat with Riley coaching the enemy. It felt so "right". I could follow the flow of the game so much better than the current NBA. Maybe it was just b/c i knew exactly what to expect from the offense. I dont' know if this game was famous, but Ewing put on a clinic. He used all of his moves and I think this was the point in his career where he redeveloped his power game. It was so great to see Oakley, Mason, Starks, and even Charlie Ward. You know your team is bad when you long for the days of Charlie Ward.

Those Knicks were great. I honestly miss them.

the best thing about the series 24  


by far, is that they all have excellent phone etiquette. "hold on, i'm going to put you on speaker phone. ok, you are on, and x and y are also in the room". if only the people in the real world could be like that.

a great review on certain-dri  


83 of 86 people found the following review helpful:

5 out of 5 stars Raise your hand if you're Certain!, September 15, 2003

Reviewer: chatchi (Chicago, IL) - See all my reviews
As the resident pit-stain guy in the office, I was desperate to find a solution to my excessive underarm perspiration. Whether it was being asked to get something from the top shelf -- or the never-ending requests to do the "field goal" signal -- my coworkers shared many a laugh at chatchi's expense.

While it is not uncommon to have perspiration rings under the arms of your shirt, it IS uncommon to have those rings bleed down to your belt. Doctor's call it Axillary Hyperhidrosis -- chatchi calls it "Swamp Pits". My perspiration was becoming so unmanageable, I would wear four (4) undershirts to prevent the stains from bleeding through to my dress shirts. The idea worked, but the extra layers only caused chatchi to sweat even more.

The average adult perspires a little more than one quart of fluid per day. chatchi perspired more than SEVEN quarts of fluid per day. After failing numerous job interviews, and scaring away an immeasurable amount of potential romantic companions because of my mind-boggling sweat production, it was time for me to get help.

My search ended with Certain Dri. This remarkable, non-prescription product is applied to the underarm area before you go to bed. While the concept might seem unusual, you wouldn't be reading this review unless you were used to going to unusual lengths to prevent underarm perspiration.

Certain Dri is applied in place of your regular anti-perspirant/deodorant, but I'd advise still using a scented deodorant every day, since Certain Dri does a less than adequate job of masking the stench. The first time you use the product, don't be surprised if you experience a slight irritation to the underarms (comparable to bathing in gasoline, then setting yourself on fire) -- that's the 12% aluminum chloride going to work. Don't worry, the irritation will go away after a couple of days. The roll-on applicator is less than desirable -- ripping out armpit hairs during application -- but I suppose it's better than those nasty aerosol brands.

Just how good is Certain Dri? Well, the directions say that, when used "sparingly", Certain Dri can prevent perspiration for up to 84 hours after application. I've found that I can literally go weeks without applying Certain Dri, and my pits remain dry as a desert. My confidence has been restored in interviews, and women are no longer turned off by extreme underarm moisture.

Thanks to Certain Dri, chatchi had the last laugh.

i feel like i've already told the first AOL story before...  


but i couldn't find it in my email archives.

I can't retell the whole story, but here are some highlights:

after being on hold for over an hour, i finally got a live person. I told them that I didn't have a computer anymore and thus I had no need for AOL. He suggested that I ask for a new computer for xmas, which was coming up. I told the guy that my family couldn't afford that. He said that he'd give me two months free, and then if i do get a computer, i'll still have AOL. I said that should i ever get a new computer, i'll give them a call and sign back up. He said "well, why don't you avoid all that hassle of having to resign up and just stick with AOL". I said that was pretty funny, b/c I could sign up for AOL on the internet, or instantly get someone on the phone, but when I want to cancel i have to go through all this rig-a-ma-roll. When he suggested that I should still hold out for a computer i lost it. I was apologizing while i was yelling, telling them i know they are just doing their job, but then i screamed "unless you want to buy me a computer yourself, then the next words out of your mouth better be that my account is cancelled. And, if those AREN'T the next words, then I'm going to get angry. And trust me, you don't want to see me angry, b/c then we're going to have problems." That got the job done.

Tony Z, i may have told you that my plans for the NEXT time i cancel AOL was to say that i didn't have any arms and couldn't type on the keyboard anymore. I definitely remember debating using that excuse or even a "i was just told i have a week to live". But, Ross told me that using the political angle will get them right off the phone. I had such a great experience about ranting about politics that I almost want to join again.

The 5 dollar pizza  


Oh how i love thee, let me count the ways

1) You are 5 dollars

2) That includes tax, so there is no change involved

3) You are pizza. Thus, you are just my type.

4) You are right next door to another friend's house.

5) The first time we met, you showed a lot of potential. Slightly undercooked, but there was an excess amount of cheese.

6) The 2nd time we met, you were perfect.

7) Here is a picture from our first encounter.

How to cancel AOL in 5 minutes  


They said the 4 minute mile would be the ultimate human feat. They were wrong. Despite all the obstacles, I was able to cancel AOL in under 5 minutes. First, when you call their main number, ignore all the menus, and continuously hit 0. Eventually, you will be directly connected to a real life human being. The guy that I spoke with then gave me a different number to specifically cancel my account. Another real life human being picked up. After telling him that I wanted to cancel, and confirming my billing information, here’s how the conversation went:

Him: “so, will you be switching over to a different service”

Me: “no, I’m not going to have any internet, actually, I…”

Him: “oh, did something happen to your computer?”

Me: “No, I can just use the internet at work. Look, I realize it’s your job to try and say anything to get me to stay. But, my decision is made and there’s nothing you can say that will change it. I doubt you want to get into a political discussion, but I did some research and I have to tell you that I think AOL-Time Warner is hurting our country. I don’t want to support your company anymore. Huge media conglomerates such as your corporation limit options, stifle free speech and generally hurt the country.”


Him: “well, there really aren’t any other options. Any choice of a company you decide to use…”

Me [cutting him off]: “There you go, you said it all in that one sentence. There AREN’T any options out there. There are 5 huge conglomerates that control all the media in our country. Do you realize how dangerous that is? You control everything, and I, as a consumer, don’t have any options. You dictate what people are allowed to consume and you leave us with no other options. So, if you are telling me that I must choose between one of these companies, I tell you that my choice is “nothing”.”

Him: “Here is your cancellation information. Have a good day.”

I actually took time to pick out the soundtrack to this rant on Ocean's 12  


[for those of you wondering, I had to go with a playlist of slower sleater-kinney songs]

With all due respect to Einstein and Stephen Hawking, they've been looking in the wrong place for their T.O.E. (theory of everything). If one really wants to understand the mysteries of the universe and discover that one unifying force, they needn't look any further than Ocean's 12. Everything [sidenote: what in the world happens when you swallow weird and your tongue gets stuck to the roof of your mouth? why does that hurt so much? am i creating a suction that is ripping up my esophogus? oh man, that hurt] that is wrong in our society, and the universe in general, is captured in this terrible terrible movie.

Ocean's 11 was a decent movie. Not spectular by any means, but definitely watchable (and rewatchable to be honest). It was the kind of movie that would fall apart if you sat there with a notepad and tried to find plot holes, but held together if you gave it the benefit of the doubt and just sat back and enjoyed the ride. Ocean's 12's plot holes jump out at you and punch you in the face. I can't even tell you how low my expectations were going into this movie. But, somehow this movie underchieved.

One of the many problems with sequels is that the characters usually have to be more "X-treme to Max" in order to satisfy the fans. The funny guy has to be funnier, the dangerous guy has to be dangerouser, etc. etc. Ocean's 12 breaks that mold though. Instead, the characters just act completely different. Was there any mention of Danny being this legendary thief in the first movie? The way i remember it (and i might be wrong as i haven't seen 11 in awhile) was that Danny was a decent thief who was looking for one more big score before he hung it up. He had the plan, but needed the help of the 10 other specific experts. Now, Danny is so famous, that the plot actually centers around another thief being jealous of his reputation.

Matt Damon's character (linus) was the rookie of the group in 11. But, he had a decent reputation because his father had been a pro. In 12, he starts out by completely kissing Danny's ass, and then has an "aw shucks" attitude with Brad Pitt's character. "please let me have a bigger role in this thing. I'll be ever so grateful". Where is this coming from? He didn't act like this in the first movie. Oh yeah, b/c this new characteristic will fit into the plot (more on that later).

Wow, i just saw a "commercial" (is that the right word?) for ocean's 12 on hbo and my hate started boiling. I started to think about all the things i hated about this movie, and then i remembered that i had started a rant on it, but got sidetracked. Sure enough, the above was written weeks ago. I can't even remember the movie enough to continue. things are popping into my head right now, but i'm not at all confident that i can remember everything. so i'm not going to try. i can't do it justice.

this move was bad. fin.

Oh man, the simpsons just. don't. get. it.  


in a commercial for the simpsons last night, the voice over guy said "sunday nights on fox...the only place to see NEW simpsons episodes." There's so much to be said about that statement. Can they really possibly think that all of the syndicated episodes of the simpsons is dilluting the market? ha! Those old episodes are the only thing keeping fans from completely rejecting new simpsons episodes. People cling to their past glory in desperation. "just maybe it might be decent this week". Well, it never is. Their campaign should be "Sunday nights on fox....if you squint hard enough, it almost looks like the same show"

another one of those forwarded emails about how great Bush is  



With my comments in bold italics.

Things that make you think a little:

There were 39 combat related killings in
Iraq in January.
In the fair city of
Detroit there were 35 murders in the
month of January. That's just one American city,
about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of

Detroit: over 900,000 residents (11th most popular US city), medium household income is under 30,000, and over 26% of the population is below the poverty line. 47% of citizens are deemed "functionally illiterate" in 1998, and numbers are currently higher. 72% of all children born in Detroit are to unwed mothers. It's the 2nd most violent city (Camden NJ is #1). There are racial tensions in Detroit and there has been a lot of white flight in the past, which has helped erode the middle class.

But yes, let's look at the despair in Detroit and twist it into proof that the Iraqi war isn't that bad. Let's only look at the number of "combat related" killings while ignoring all of the non fatal injuries. Who cares if soldiers lose body parts or develop illnesses based on our use of chemical weapons? Only deaths count.

A fraction of the money used on the war in Iraq could have been used to help the people in Detroit .

When some claim that President Bush shouldn't
have started this war, state the following:

"Some?" Most of
America now thinks the choice to go to war was wrong.

a. FDR led us into World War II.

"Led us into". Note: He didn't start the war. He didn't jump right in. He entered the war when it became absolutely necessary to. Not a moment sooner.

Germany never attacked us; Japan
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 112,500 per year.

Let's compare the Iraqi war (which essentially consists of our army going against insurgents) to a war that went on for years on a GLOBAL scale. Then, the Iraqi war will look small in comparison.
Germany attacked free democratic nations. We've always had a policy against such aggression, as well we should.

c. Truman finished that war and started one in
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 18,334 per year.

I don't know anything about the Korean war.

d John F. Kennedy started the
Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.

"started the Vietnam conflict". Could that be any more vague? The conflict was already brewing by 1957, and if you look at the bigger picture of the "cold war", it's pretty unfair to put all the blame on JFK. He is a democrat though….

e. Johnson turned
Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost ....
an average of 5,800 per year.

The issues surrounding the Vietnam war are too complex to just label as this. But yes, I'll agree that there are similarities between Veitnam and Iraq . Shouldn't we learn from our mistakes?

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three
times by
Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on
multiple occasions.

It blows my mind that Clinton is blamed for dropping the ball on terrorism, but Bush has never received even the slightest complaint for allowing 9/11 to happen on his watch. Clinton gets blamed for Bin Laden, but Regan/Bush aren't even mentioned? Yeah, that's fair. Hey, how come the writer failed to post the number of casualties in the Bosnian War?

g. In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush
has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled
al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in
Libya, Iran, and North
without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who
slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

Please define: liberated, crushed, crippled, without, and terrorist. Because the way I see it, those countries (what's the 2nd country,
Afghanistan ?) are not even close to being liberated. Afghanistan is said to be just as bad, if not worse, than it was before, and if memory serves, I think the Taliban is back to being in quasi control there. Is Iraq liberated? Really? The only news I've heard about positive things in Iraq has been from either Fox News or the fake propaganda stories that our government has infiltrated the Iraqi newspapers with. The Bible is perfect b/c it says so, and the war in Iraq is a-ok because our government says so.

How can it be claimed that we haven't fired a shot? We destroyed a country to flex our military muscles. North Korea is an entirely different issue, despite being lumped in with the "axis of evil". Libya and Iran are very complex issues, and we've royally screwed things up with these nations via the Iraqi war.

The Democrats are complaining
about how long the war is taking.
But ..
It took less time to take
Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation.

"take Iraq". If we've taken it already, why is there still a problem?

We've been looking for evidence for chemical weapons
for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.

Looking for evidence? We were told that they definitely had them and that they could be launched in 30 minutes. Hold onto this lie that we're eventually going to find them. It makes you very credible.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the
Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his
Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick

I wish I could spell that Latin word that translates to "attack the person, not the argument". Ad homonym ? Hillary is a bitch, and Ted is a murderer. I get it. Let's resort to name calling when the democrats attempt to make points.

It took less time to take
Iraq than it took
to count the votes in

Do you really want to bring up the 2000 election in this argument? Really?

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!

When I read this line, I actually started to think this entire email was being sarcastic. First of all, people who join the military already have an extreme view on patriotism and our country. But, even this group's morale has been sinking.

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts

The media is biased all right. If I was one of 5 huge media conglomerates that generates billions of dollars, you can rest assured I'd put out a message that protected my interests. One of the big 5, General Electric, generates enormous amounts of revenue from military defense contracts. Damn that liberal media bias!

- Show quoted text -

But Wait there's more!

Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13

Some people still don't understand why military personnel
do what they do for a living. This exchange between
Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum
is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one
man's explanation of why men and women in the armed
services do what they do for a living.

This IS a typical, though sad, example of what
some who have never served think of the military.

Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
"How can you run for Senate
when you've never held a real job?"

Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
"I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different
occasions. I was in the space program. It wasn't my
checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was
not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the
daily cash receipts to the bank."

"I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day...
to a veteran's hospital and look those men
with their mangled bodies .. in the eye, and tell THEM
they didn't hold a job!

You go with me to the Space Program at NASA
and go, as I have gone, to the widows and Orphans
of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee...
and you look those kids in the eye and tell them
that their DADS didn't hold a job.

You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in
Arlington National Cemetery , where I have more friends
buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch

You stand there, and you think about this nation,
and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job?

What about you?"

For those who don't remember ..
During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney
representing the Communist Party in the

Now he's a Senator!

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
- Show quoted text -

If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran.

It might not be a bad idea to keep this circulating.

Oh my god, Metzenbaum represented the communist party as an attorney. That means he must be a commie-pinko. This entire speech was just to make us all swell with patriotic pride about how people give their lives for our country. Call me crazy, but shouldn't that be a reason to be extra cautious about determining what they are going to go die for?

How about we thank a teacher by not diverting resources to public schooling and keeping it for your precious private schools? And in what war was "English" on the line? The closest I could think of is WWII, but clearly that was a bad war to get involved in, right?

My near death lunch experience  


My George Foreman grill no longer works, so I’m forced to go back in time and cook food like a savage…on the stove. I knew there was a reason why I hate stove cooking, but I couldn’t remember it. To save time, I heated the olive oil on high. But, I forgot to lower the flame before I stuck the chicken in. Immediately, and I mean IMMEDIATELY, the oil start bursting into little bombs of pain. It was so out of control that I had a slight concern over the oil spilling into the flame and causing a fire. But, besides that, those little balls of pain hurt when they hit your arm and face. So as I’m trying to dive back into ground zero to lower the flame, I notice that my suits and dress shirts are dangerously close to the stove (I had moved the rack the other day to find a pair of sweat pants…that’s an entirely different embarrassing story). Since I never ever want to buy another suit again, I decide to ignore the pain of scorching oil and move the rack. But, I had just touched raw chicken, so I couldn’t use my left hand. I try moving it with my right hand, and the entire thing starts to collapse. Now I’m hanging onto the remains of the makeshift closet with one hand, holding my raw chicken infested hand up away from me, and having oil burn into my flesh.

I honestly didn’t know what to do. I couldn’t figure out what the lesser of two evils was. The closet was actually falling into another one, and if they both went down, it would be hours of work. On the other hand, the oil was really hurting. The time it took me to decide proves once and for all that I’m not good in a crisis. In the end, I let the clothes go first. Luckily, it wasn’t “that” hard to put it back together, and the clothes don’t look that messed up.

Lunch, of course, is ruined.

good old RU, creating controversy  


"Twenty coaches voted for their own teams, with none straying too far from the consensus.

Among the notables, Rutgers coach Greg Schiano gave the Scarlet Knights (7-4) their only vote, putting them 25th on his ballot."

American History X - an email i wrote  


I can’t believe I avoided a re-watching of American History X because you were so against the ending. I watched it tonight, and I think you really missed the ball on this one. You assumed facts not in evidence. There are only two major actions that Danny does. The first is to take down the flags in his room. I don’t think this is an unreasonable action at all. First, I think you don’t fully appreciate the impact of the scene at the party. That entire group turned on Danny’s role model / brother. His “friend” Seth pulled a trigger on him, while his brother’s girlfriend was screaming for him to pull the trigger. If I was Danny, I would immediately be against that group. There’s a hiarchy in terms of what people will blindly follow (some freaks call it a council of gods). Danny blindly followed both the DOC and his brother, but his brother would always trump.

Regardless, taking down the posters isn’t completely rejecting the beliefs. First, he could at the very least be respecting his brother’s beliefs. They are sharing a room, and maybe Danny is considerate enough to not want that stuff up there if it’s going to make his brother uncomfortable. Remember, the guy did get raped by a bunch of Nazis. Second, rejecting the DOC is separate from rejecting the racist beliefs. It’s very possible that Danny understood the dangers of being in that group and was deciding to leave it.

The fact that Danny isn’t completely turned is pretty apparent when he learns about Seth being attacked by the black guys. He asks his brother if they should go visit him in the hospital. This is a guy who pulled a trigger on his brother the night before! Furthermore, Danny didn’t change his look at all the next morning for school. He still had the chain on his wallet, which I believe is a trademark of skinheads.

The paper is probably the reason you most thought Danny had changed. But, I don’t think you really listened to the words. He didn’t say that everything he believed in was wrong. He said that carrying around hate is baggage. This was an essay on his brother’s experiences. Is there any question that his brother let his hate be baggage? He spent three years in prison because of his hate. The moral of the story he told Danny was that his hate was baggage. I think it’s very plausible to believe a racist person could, in the course of 24 hours, realize that it’s wrong to focus on your hate all the time. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve resolved to just be RVD (wow, I originally typed that as RBV and had to think about his name) at the spur of the moment. “Ok, I’m not going to let this stuff consume me anymore.”. I probably say that once every six months.

I always assumed the last quote in the paper was MLK because Danny says “I picked a guy that you would like.” Well, I had to look it up online, and it’s actually Abraham Lincoln. To be honest, it’s slightly racist to say that the teacher would like Lincoln. He might as well have thrown in a “you know, because he freed you people.” As a side note, I’ve read some very racist comments by Lincoln.

Anyway, if you reexamine the paper, it’s message isn’t “I’ve been wrong about everything”, but rather “allowing the hatred to consume my brother has really screwed up our lives.” A racist could have such thoughts without completely abandoning his belief system.

I will grant you that tearing down the posters is a bit overdramatic, and the tone in which Danny narrates his paper is a little too cute for my taste. Clearly, the implication was there that he was “changing”. Leaving you to assume that makes the ending that much more tragic. However, I think that it’s a lot more open ended and vague than you originally thought. This wasn’t the feel good story of the year, where Danny is saved in the course of two hours. There were three life altering events (brother gets out of prison, brother is turned on at party, and brother discusses the past three years) in the course of one night. It gave the tone of a paper (on that very subject!) a distinct edge to it. Who’s to say that Danny wouldn’t continue to believe in his racist beliefs for an extended period had he not been murdered? You were expecting the happy ending, and then allowed the open ended questions to reaffirm that.

I know you don’t watch movies a second time unless they are terrible, but you should give this another try.

Rumors of Anna Benson being traded!  


Amazin's hurler's
wife pitches fit

My comments in bold italics

Mets pitcher Kris Benson's hottie wife, Anna, is livid at team officials, alleging that a potential Playboy spread caused team brass to start trade talk.

The bombshell wife of Mets pitcher Kris Benson blew up at the Amazin's yesterday for trying to trade her husband - and charged her negotiations to pose nude for Playboy were to blame.

Sexy Anna Benson insisted she's not baring it all anytime soon and ripped the Mets for shopping her hubby just a year after signing him to a four-year deal.

"We would never, ever have signed with New York if they had said they were going to trade us," said Anna Benson, 29.

“we” didn’t sign, Anna. Kris did. The Mets pay KRIS BENSON to play for them. You are the wife of a baseballplayer. You consistently attempt to make money off of his name, and it’s embarrassing and degrading.

"I was Miss [Politically Correct] for the Mets the entire time I was there.

Miss Politically correct posed for FHM magazine and went on record saying that she would sleep with every Mets employee if Kris ever cheated on her.

"I have no deal with Playboy," she said, adding that talks crumbled last month over money.

Sounds like you attempted to have a deal, and it fell through. It also sounds like if the money was ever right, that deal would be back on the table. And, is it a big surprise that she demanded more money from Playboy than they were willing to pay? How much of her celebrity comes from the fact that she’s married to a baseball player? 95%?

The pinup model also blasted the team for signing Carlos Delgado, who she suggested is unpatriotic because he has, in the past, refused to stand for the playing of "God Bless America."

"How are they going to sit there and say it's so controversial when they sign someone like Delgado, who turns his back on our flag?" Anna Benson said.

Let’s avoid the substance of Delgado’s political stance for a minute. The Mets inquired BEFORE they traded for him about his stance, and he said he would stand for god bless America if that’s what they wanted. So, if Anna is going to hold Delgado accountable for past actions, I guess her “I’m not in negotiations with Playboy” is a moot issue b/c she’s already posed for Penthouse.

Now, as for the substance part, I’m not even going to discuss. Delgado is a hero for standing up for what he believes in despite the consequences. He was a free agent last year, and his “controversy” probably cost him millions of dollars.

Still, posing in her birthday suit would be as American as apple pie, said Benson, who once threatened to sleep with the entire Mets team if she caught her husband cheating.

"Playboy is all-American. Everyone from Marilyn Monroe to Cindy Crawford has posed," fumed Benson, who once posed topless for Penthouse. "They didn't turn their back on the flag."


Mets brass have acknowledged trying to move Kris Benson and his $7.5 million salary, and insiders say management is uncomfortable with the prospect of Anna Benson posing nude for Playboy.

Being uncomfortable with something, and trading a player because of it are two different things.

But a team spokesman shot down the trade rumors and insisted there would be no ruffled feathers in Flushing over a Playboy pictorial.

"We do not make moves based on anything the players' wives do," said Mets spokesman Jay Horwitz. "We know she's trying to build a career for herself and we wish her well."

…build a career for herself [by using her husband’s semi celebrity status]…

Kris Benson, 31, had a so-so first full season with the Amazin's, going 10-8 with a 4.13 earned run average.

Why doesn’t Anna address his mediocrity? Or the fact that the SECOND he signed his contract last year, every single GM and fan were laughing about how ridiculously overpaid he was. The GMs stopped laughing when they realized that this contract was so out of line, that it literally shifted the market. Everyone points to the Kris Benson contract as the single biggest reason that pitchers were overpaid last season.

But Anna Benson angrily called the Mets out for saying they planned to build the team around him when they inked the free agent to a deal last year.

"They wanted [veteran pitcher] Tommy [Glavine] to school him, and then they turn around and trade us?" she asked. "The whole thing is upsetting to everybody."

“trade US”??? What? Ok, Mrs. Doug Christie.

The hot-under-the-collar hottie says she's also angry because the couple came to New York, in part, to help 9/11 charities. Some $1 million in Kris Benson's contract is earmarked for charitable donations.

"We wanted to help the city because of 9/11," Anna Benson said. "We specifically did it for New York, and then they turn around and trade us? I just don't understand."

Yeah, I’m sure those charitable donations weren’t made to boost your PR. That’s why you kept them anonymous until now. Oh wait. And I guess you aren’t allowed to care about the 9/11 victims unless you live/play in NY.

And, btw, sweetheart. If you weren’t so greedy, you could have accepted less money and in return the Mets may have given you a “no trade clause”. Are you THAT shocked that a team might want to trade a player? You had the chance to protect yourself, and you didn’t. Good riddance.

This is why Pam Oliver gets paid the big bucks  


Remember, her job consists of asking two questions: one at half time and one at the end of the game.

end of the game question: "Why don't you talk a little bit about, oh, i don't know...the game plan that Tim Lewis had coming into this sucker."

Awkwardness follows me everywhere  


I know Steve claims that I lead an awkward existence, but I’m convinced that the awkwardness finds me. I had a nice little morning planned: I was going to wake up early and go food shopping and then get some fresh bread at Calandras. I was thinking about stopping at Bed Bath and Beyond too, but didn’t know if I’d have time. Anyway, the roads were completely empty and I felt alone in the universe (in the good way). I had a fortress of solitude between my headphones and hooded jacket. I get a coffee at DD and decide to drink it outside before I continue walking (I’m incapable of drinking and walking at the same time as pregaming at concerts has proven).

I’m lost inside a SOAD song when I notice a cop is pulling over to right where I’m standing. I look around, and there is no one anywhere close around me. I assume he’s going in for coffee, but he doesn’t get out of his car. Now I’m a little nervous. Could this be considered loitering? Am I not allowed to drink coffee outside of DD? Ok, technically I’m a few stores over from DD, but that was just b/c I didn’t want to be standing there with other people walking in and out of the store (shoot, maybe I DID bring this awkwardness upon myself).

Anyway, now I’m standing there with a cop car two feet from me. Like Han Solo tells Chewbacca (wow! Chewbacca doesn’t create a red line under it in Word. Man, I wish I could remember the “legal” word that is very common but still not in spell check. I should be offended that a commercial/entertainment word like Chewbacca is in their database), I want to keep my distance, but not look like I’m keeping my distance. So, I make a big production out of putting my coffee down and buttoning up my hood. Now, I have no peripheral vision or ability to hear. If the cop is going to try and get my attention, I’m screwed.

So, after I think I’ve spent enough time “preparing” to leave, I duck my head down to look into his window. With the glare, I couldn’t tell if he was looking at me or not. I looked just a little too long into his window, and since I didn’t make eye contact (at least I don’t think I did), I couldn’t even give a head nod. At this point, I’m resided (word?) to the fact that I’ve completely blown this interaction with the cop and now he’s going to have it out for me. I feel completely awkward, and decide to just make a break for it.

I get out into the parking lot, and OF COURSE a car starts coming. So, being no more than 3 steps away from the cop car, I have to start running. My back is to the cop, and I’m running for my life. I can’t hear or see, so for all I know he’s telling me to stop, or thinks I’m black and is already drawing his gun to shoot me. [it’s obvious that comment is a knock on the police and not a racist statement, right?].

Take a guess how this story ends? Of course I slip and almost kill myself. I swear, I’m the king of the “start to slip and fall and somehow catch myself at the last second”. It’s 8:30 in the morning, on a snowy Sunday morning, and I’m running “from the cops” and completely self conscious of my awkwardness. I’m never leaving my apartment again.

The thread i started on Nip/Tuck which i wish i hadn't.  


I'm so angry that the vast majority of people didn't fully understand what i was saying. Or didn't care. Oh well, here it is:

I skimmed through the many posts on the episode review, and people seemed to love the cake scene. I just don't get it. It seems pretty obvious to me that the writers were more concerned with appeasing the fans than staying true to the characters. The premise of the show two heterosexual guys who love each other. Having them act faux-gay, even for that brief moment, takes away from that premise. It cheapens it. And I feel it caters to the people who don't REALLY appreciate this complex bond that Christian/Sean share.

I know people will say i'm reading too much into the scene, and they were just goofing around, but it just didn't ring true to me. There's no way the woman would confuse them for being gay. First of all, i'm quite certain that it was Kimber who booked the tasting. Or at the very least, when Christian booked it, he mentioned who the parties were going to be. Or, when they arrived, someone said "btw, my fiance couldn't make it, so my friend came to help me".

I'm disapointed that so many fans were excited by the faux-gay stuff. It annoyed me on two levels: the first being the aforementioned complaints about it being out of character and used just to appease the fans. The 2nd is that i find it homophobic to a certain degree. Yes, i understand that the creator is gay (i THINK i have that fact right, but I may be wrong). But, that doesn't give him, or the show, free reign to write anything they want about the issue. If sean and christian acted "black", wouldn't that be racist [and yes, i know saying "acting black" is in and of itself racist. The more accurate description would be poor/urban city/street]? Why is it ok for straight people to act gay? It was meant to be lighthearted and comical. What's funny about acting gay?

Of course, maybe i'm just in left field on this issue. I think Will/Grace has absolutely set the equal-rights/gay movement back decades.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 7:01 pm
I thoroughly agree on all points
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 7:19 pm
They never implied there was anything wrong/bad/silly about being gay. The only humor in it was that they weren't the couple, and they were goofing around, maybe pulling the cake woman's chain a little. Actually, the fact they were so unruffled by being mistaken for a gay couple sort of implies to me that neither one sees it as something that's bad or humiliating. Homophobic or anti-gay men would have corrected her misconception in a big hurry, and possibly been very offended by it.

As for it cheapening their "complex" bond, how? They were *joking* around. There are some fans who will enjoy the moment because they'd like to see the relationship take that turn (so where's the harm if some of us get a little guilty thrill that way?), and others who will just laugh at it because to them, it shows how totally comfortable these guys are with their heterosexual friendship that they *can* joke around like that without it changing anything.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 8:00 pm
I think the fact that the clip of them holding hands was featured in all of the previews for the episode speaks volumes. It wasn't just a throw-away casual joking moment. In some small way, it was sort of "here, we are giving the fans what they always wanted." This has been done in other shows as well. I wasn't a huge x-files fan, but i watched enough to know that fans wanted Scully and Mulder together. And there was an episode where a shape-shifter (my god, i can't believe i'm writing this) made himself look like Mulder and "they" almost hooked up.

I just felt that the hand holding and stuff wasn't something that the characters would really do, but rather what we would want them to do (even in this joking manner).

And i think the characters are at least a bit homophobic, as their reaction to Quentin shows.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 8:48 pm
That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. "Giving the viewers what they want"? It's the 10th episode of the season and it lasted like 20 seconds. I really don't think it was meant to stand out. It was just a joke. Two friends kidding around. That's just how relationship between them is. There was nothing out of character about it.

And they are far from homophobic considering their anestisiologist happens to be a lesbian. Christian was merely making it firmly known to Quentin that "he isn't that way".

modified: Nov 28 - 12:51 am GMT

modified: Nov 28 - 12:52 am GMT
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 9:27 pm
I think some people are taking the show too seriously. The show doesnt take itself entirely seriously. Its highly stylized fantasy with blatant disregard to feasible logistics. I think its a mistake to read so much into it.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 10:08 pm
go back to the posts about the episode and you will see more than a handful of people who specifically mention that cake scene as being their favorite. And again, it was featured in the previews. But i guess the fact that it was only 20 seconds is more important than those two facts.

Also, why does Christian comment about whether the Chris on the phone is male or female? It's a little dig about being bi-sexual. And remember when Christian tells Sean about him being bi and they both poke fun at each other that Quentin might have a crush on them.

I don't buy into the "oh, it's just a TV show" argument when it comes to how things affect our society. These types of things have an impact on the viewers. Will it change our country's view of homosexuality? Of course not. But everything adds to the social consciousness. I feel that it moved it (ever so slightly) towards a more homophobic society.

Again, will someone please comment on my question about how the scene would have been perceived if they were acting "black" instead of "gay"?
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 10:14 pm
the cake scene was referenced 17 times in the episode thread.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 10:27 pm
People would be flat-out offended if they acted black - especially black people. They are two completely different types of people. It would be tasteless, unfunny, and above all racist.

Why do you automatically assume just because this show talks about homosexuality that the writers are trying to send a moral message? It's not uncommon for people to be bi or gay. These characters just happen to be gay. It adds to their storylines. It makes them interesting.

The reason why people love this scene is because it is FUNNY. The gay issue itself doesn't make it entertaining or shocking. It's just a cute scene between two buddies joking around. That's it.

modified: Nov 28 - 2:29 am GMT
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:00 pm
I like the scene because it was funny and after everything that's been going on with the show, this light hearted moment was a well needed break, for Sean and Christian, and for the people watching the show. I also love how it showed that the guys are so comfortable with themselves, and their friendship, that instead of being quick to correct the woman and tell her they weren't actually a couple, like a lot of straight men would have done, they had fun with it. I've joked around with my friends like that on more than one occasion. I just think it shows how our society today is more accepting of homosexuality/bisexuality. If someone was actually homophobic, I don't think they would joke around the way Sean and Christian did.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:21 pm
1) And they are far from homophobic considering their anestisiologist happens to be a lesbian.

2) it's not uncommon for people to be bi or gay. These characters just happen to be gay. It adds to their storylines. It makes them interesting.

I don’t see how these two statements don’t contradict each other. You use the fact that a character is a lesbian as evidence that the writers aren’t homophobic. Then, you go and say that characters are multilayered and being gay is just a trait and not dispositive of anything. I agree with the latter, but not the former.

Just “having a gay character” on the show doesn’t necessarily mean that a show is pro-tolerance. If that character adheres to the negative stereotypes that are common in society, then it reinforces those beliefs. There was a time when movies had people in blackface. Do you think that those types of shows were immune to contributing to racist stereotypes?

Unfortunately, we still live in a society where a gay character is gay first, and a regular character second. Liz has been fleshed out quite nicely as a full character. She’s not just a carbon copy of generic lesbian stereotypes. I definitely feel that this helps society grow in terms of tolerance. Another good example would be David and his partner from Six Feet Under. Their characters were so deep and complex that the viewers were forced to see them as “regular people”. Their relationship was one of the realest I’ve ever seen portrayed on television.

By no means do I feel that a writer or tv show should feel “obligated” to become a social activist. But there is a general responsibility that comes with producing art that is going to be consumed by the masses. Negative stereotypes and intolerance can seep into your art and become detrimental to society.

Everything effects us; it all contributes to our overview of society. We may think we are above this, and that we have free will, but there is a reason that corporations spend billions of dollars in advertising. Sometimes these stereotypes and influences seep into our subconscious without us even knowing it.

You label the cake scene as harmless fun that lasted only 20 seconds. You keep saying it was funny, but you don’t ever explain WHY it was funny. I want to know specifically why it was funny. You say acting black is bad, but acting gay isn’t, but you don’t actually explain why. In my opinion, acting gay is the equivalent of telling a polish Joke. It’s not overtly homophobic, but there’s something subtle there. We are almost implying that it’s funny to be gay.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:30 pm
kronicfatigue said: "Again, will someone please comment on my question about how the scene would have been perceived if they were acting "black" instead of "gay"?"

i was among those who said the cake scene was one of my favorite parts of the ep. i also happen to be black---or as i frequently refer to myself "colored" as that is what it says on my birthcertificate---[i was born in 1958] and i am also part blackfoot indian---but i digress; back to the question. the reason the cake scene appealed to me predominately was the double-entendre dialog i.e. "you're the one i want, the only one i want" for me was clearly christian teasing sean about wanting him to come back to the practice. for me if the dialog had been delivered in a derrogetory/stereotypical way read "lisp" i would have found it offensive rather than cute and funny. but it wasn't. it was in a tongue-in-cheek, casual, matter of fact way. i get your point about the "acting black" question, but again if someone were to deliver a line in a derrrogatory/stereotypical way yes i would be offended. if it were simply funny and not intentionally hurtful i would not be offended. for example some people are offended by what i consider classic comedy; the amos & andy sitcom of the 1950's. the main characters owned their own cab company at a time when in real life that kind of prosperity was virtually unheard of, and it was funny[sorry to any politically correct minded who may not share that view.] also in the film bulworth, warren beatty's character in many scenes for lack of a better descriptive "acts black". i had no problem with that---i was troubled by halle berry's character referring to him as her n***** and him responding to her in kind. since childhood the "n" word is one i've found distasteful, don't use it, and am offended when i hear it no matter who is saying it. i know it's just a word, but there it is. i'll tell you what did offend me in the ep was when they referred to anglo-saxon noses as being "more refined", and the patient tacitly agreeing with that description. WTF man!
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:39 pm
Interesting distinction regarding the lack of the lisp. Just saw the scene again, and you are right, it's not over the top stereotypical (although i didn't care for the way christian said "sweetheart").

I only saw parts of Bullworth, but I hated it. Amos and Andy were before my time.

We could have a whole seperate discussion on the N word. There was an amazing documentary on the word...It was fascinating to see so many different opinions on using the word. There's one group of thought that says it's more offensive to call it "the N word" instead of actually saying the real word. In short, they think that it desensatizes (sp) us to the power of the word, when we SHOULD be shocked and offended.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:41 pm
shees! this is SO outta hand. Them acting gay is not homophobic, nor does it have any impact on society's views of gays. Straight guys mock gay guys. They do it in real life, they did it on the show, because the show is supposed to be portraying life (sort of). Thats all there is to it.

I cant even believe this thread is serious. White comics mock black guys all the time and vice versa, and everyone laughs. Nobody makes huge protests that it shouldnt be done because it will shift our society into racism.

WAYYY too serious here. Of course the media can impact society. But there's nothing going on at that level here. You expect every show to filter itself into being politically correct? S and C are best friends. Best friends are not politically correct with each other.

Well, I loved the seen anyway. I had fun with it. And it hasnt made me less accepting of gays or anyone else.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 27 - 11:51 pm
Yes, straight guys mock gay guys in real life. Yes, white comics make fun of black people and vice versa. And, shock of all shocks, we live in a racist and homophobic world. We have states altering their constitution to make sure marriage is only between man and woman.

All I'm saying is that I appreciate when art attempts to better the world (or at least not make it a little worse). I think these characters mocking homosexuals, without any consequences or counter argument, has the potential to hurt society.

Not sure if you caught the Rosa Parks memorial service, but Al Sharpton gave a great speech that discussed, in part, about the role the entertainers has in black society. He was dismayed about how black women are potrayed as "hoes" and how black rappers use the N word and glorify violence. The rappers defense is always "hey, i'm just holding up a mirror to what's around me". Sharpton ended his speech saying that mirrors aren't just used to reflect, they are used to correct. I hate the idea of cliches/sound bites, but i think that was really on point.

If you want to just be "entertained" by a tv show, that is fine. But i enjoy a show a lot more when it makes me think about my own morality and other issues. And it frustrates me when I see a show that I think adds to something negative in the world.

But, to each his own.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 12:52 am
I still think you're reading WAY too much in here. Of course we have racism and homophobia in society. I'm appalled at the anti gay marraige movement. It makes me ashamed of our society, quite frankly. But that doesnt mean that ANY treatment of the issues in the media that doesnt bend over backwards to be politically correct and change the world is contributing to the problem.

there's nothing in that scene that contributed to any problem. Thats not a 'to each his own' thing. Being able to laugh is not the same thing as propogating ridicule. With all the real problems with homophobia and racism in our society, I think your efforts would be better spent where there is real trouble. There is none here. Just fun here. For most of us.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 2:59 am
I don't think kronic is reading too much into n/t. Reading into entertainment is an important discipline, and nowadays a major part of sociology. It's also one of my favorite things to do.I did sense a subtle homophobia in the scene, Like they were making fun of the chance that they might be gay, or as omniscient viewers of a parallel realty, making fun of such a possibility. But more than that I thought it aws an acknowledgement that S+C's relationship exists somewhere between platonic friendship and gay romantic relationship. Lots of scholars argue that sexuality is a spectrum, not just 3 defined points of gay, bi and straight. Witness the threads on this board talking about S+C being in love, or people wanting to see them have sex, etc. It is because they have demonstrated willingness to be open with each other, to love and support each other, that viewers recongize that their relationship is somewhere in the middle. I found the scene funny, but not because I think gayness is funny, but because the writers,in a tongue-in-cheek way, admitted to us that they're in on the fantasy that many viewers have. And admit it, when Sean said "I love that you love me that way," barely keeping a straight face, it was precious. Perhaps Sean thinks such a scenario is absurd, but not because he thinks gayness is absurd. Moreso because the cake store woman finally gave them an outlet to express a side of their relationship they always knew was there without having to actually be gay. They were making an ironic comment on themselves through a kind of third-person view. Does this make sense? It's hard for me to word it, but maybe it's like they were looking at Bizarro S+C, or flying overhead looking at themselves like in It's a Wonderful Life. I think you can analyze this scene and still find it funny.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:18 am
Well of course s and c were making fun of gays, and displaying some homophobia. And all the other things you describe in the scene, of course thats there. What I'm saying Kronic is reading in is that there is some negative position on the issue that the show is expressing. Its just a harmless scene with two guys doing politically incorrect things. Its not the show making a statement about homosexuality or contributing to negative attitudes. They showed sean hitting julia too, that doesnt mean the show is contributing to some mysogenistic violent movement?

He's just reading all this heavy stuff in that just isnt there. All the stuff you cite, stevecoy, is of course there. So I guess I would have been more correct to say he's reading the 'wrong' things in to it. In my opinion anyway.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:28 am
Sterotypes.. Hmmm... This has ruffled a few feathers... The 'cake-lady' thought that Sean and Christian were a couple, because they were cake-tasting together.. She was the one that looked so dumb for that assumption. So why not humiliate her comments more by playing the "gay sterotype"??? That is what I saw in it...
That is why I found it amusing... I was laughing at her stupidity, not 'the scene'... It is how both actors portrayed it... I think others saw that as well... It was over the top..

Someone is taking things a bit too serious here.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:19 am
I think the scene is funny because they were mistaken for being something they weren't and they went along with it as a joke. That's funny to me. It's as simple as that. If these characters were at all homophobic, they'd be disgusted by what she assumed. If actually believe the writers take a negative stance on homosexuality, then watch the episode "Sophia Lopez". You will see that you are clearly wrong.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:36 am
Have you ever seen best friends interact? Even straight women have teased like that before. I personally think they were teasing the "cake lady". LOL. I loved the scene. I have seen many guys do that before. No harm done.

Comedians have done far more offensive things.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:52 am
omg this is so assanine.

nobody is mocking anybody else. if anything they are mocking the CAKE LADY..

gosh. this just seems to mellodramatic!!!!!
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 6:21 am
I adored the cake scene.

I think that, as several people have already pointed out, it showed the opposite of homophobia because they were so relaxed and natural about it. And don't forget they were drinking, too. I loved the fact that they both had the same reaction and it showed that they're finally fully at ease with each other after all the recent tensions (Matt's parentage, Sean's failure to fully back Christian when he was under suspicion).

There was one other aspect no on one has remarked on, which was that it came out during that scene exactly how Christian and Julia got together and Sean could see that it was partly his fault, because, as usual he had put career before family. I think Sean finally and fully forgave Christian in that scene.

I don't think they were pandering to fan expectations, except insomuch as they finally had a light and funny scene in a pretty dark season, which is something that fans have been complaining about. Ryan Murphy (who IS gay) has always said that this show was a love story between two heterosexual men and that's exactly what it is. It was good to see them together again and feeling comfortable enough about their sexuality to feel not threatened but amused by a misunderstanding.

Actually, there was another really funny scene in Oona Wentworth when Matt was called before the headmistress and talked about his "two dads" and she misunderstood and said that that was a more and more common situation. Far from being bigoted, this show is known for its sympathetic depictions of the more unusual types of human relationships.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 10:16 am
I just have a couple other comments on the cake scene. First, if anyone's worried that it's given viewers who wanted a romance between Sean and Christian what they wanted, relax. Sure, it gave some of us a few guilty giggles, and it's a scene that will probably always be a fan favorite for a myriad of reasons, but if some fans really want a romance between the guys, this wasn't it--it was a joke. What viewers looking for a romance "want" is a serious moment where a shift occurs between them. Not two buddies goofing around (but some of us have some fantasy fun with that since we probably won't ever see a serious version of that moment). So what is it hurting if a few fans have fun with that scene in a way some other fans don't approve of? It's not like we all agree on everything else about the show, either.

And second, I agree with CarverAntics--the humor was in them being mistaken for something they weren't--and that's one of the oldest comedy routines in the book. This show has too much of an open minded history about sexuality to consider this one joke among friends homophobic. Actually, the same dialogue and joking could have happened between a man and a woman who weren't really a couple who were mistaken for one. Let's say, Liz and Christian. Sean and Gina. Julia and...well, okay, she's been with most of the guys in the show, so that's not a good example , but seriously, you could take any two consenting adults who weren't a couple and put them in that scene, male or female, and the dialogue and gestures would still fit. So how can it be homophobic?
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 11:47 am
if you didn't like the way the show portrayed homosexuals...

don't watch it...

RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 12:50 pm
There are a lot of examples within the show that pro-tolerance in terms of the gay community. Like i said before, Liz is a well fleshed out character. Also, Matt's confusion was handled in an intelligent manner (even if we were eventually angered by his actions). I think in general, the show has been a positive in this area. The sophia storyline, the eventual humanizing of the Ava character, Liz's struggles, etc etc. All wonderful and positive things.

But, there has been some negatives. Christian didn't just reject Quentin in the foursome, he was flat out agitated. S and C then teased each other about Quentin having a crush on them. Christian also made a snide "is chris a man or a woman" comment when he was on the phone. These things are insignificant compared to all the positives, but they are there.

BTW, i clearly misread the comment that i latered numbered and said were hypocritical of each other. I thought you (I can't remember you name) said "the writers have a lesbian anathesiologisit (sp)" when you were actually saying "the doctors have..." Sorry about that.

I also think that has led to some of the confusion over my opinion. My concern isn't whether or not the doctors are homophobic. Overall, i don't think they are. Christian told Matt he'd be ok with whatever he was into. Sean EVENTUALLY accepted sophia.

My primary concerned was the societal impact of certain scenes. I must have a completely different group of friends then the rest of you. Everyone says that acting gay shows that Sean and Christian are tolerant of that lifestyle. From my experiences, its my homophobic friends who act like that. Maybe not actually kissing hands or touching, but they're the ones to do the lisp impersonations and limp wrist stereotypes.

And finally, someone commented about Sean hitting Julia. The difference with that scene is that there were consequences to his actions. He almost loses his daughter b/c of that violent act. That was a dark scene, and it helped bring the issue of violence to the forefront. The mixed emotions i felt over the social workers trying to do their job but hurting an "otherwise non violent" Sean was very gripping.

I respect everyone's opinions on this thread. Except for the one that said if i don't like it, just turn it off. Clearly, you didn't read my posts, b/c i'm concerned over the impact that they have on society. If you don't think they have an impact, that's fine. We can disagree on that. But, the "just turn it off" argument is insulting. I guess if i have problems with this administration, i should just leave the country. Sticking my head in the sand wont make the impact on society any less real.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 1:25 pm
So you think ALL shows should totally censor themselves to show only politically correct expressions of any social issue based on the morality of......well, who would decide whats

Why do you keep asserting that there is some significance to showing this scene? They did what people do. Shows cant allow that to air? It might reflect realistic behavior, but we need to stick our heads in the sand and not view it because YOU think its having a negative impact on society?

Only politically correct, pretty pictures that couldnt possibly offend anybody should be allowed to be aired on any media venue? Does this really make sense to you?

You sound like Jerry Falwell.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 1:52 pm
I don't know. I suppose if I had been lead to believe that Christian and Sean are seriously homophobic and they used this scene to add more fuel to their attitude, I may be able to see your point more clearly. However, I'm pretty comfortable that the scene was a private, comical moment shared by two best friends, spoofing on what the cake lady said to them. Sometimes, we just have to laugh in spite of ourselves, without digging in our heals and creating a motive that just isn't there.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 1:54 pm

modified: Nov 28 - 5:57 pm GMT
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 1:55 pm
i never once said that they shouldn't be allowed to show this scene. I just didn't care for the scene personally, b/c of the perceived impact i think it could have. Of course they should be allowed to show it. And i'm not going to stop watching/enjoying the show b/c of one scene.

A show as "edgy" as n/t is going to have some hits and some misses. I just think this one scene was a miss. I don't think it was intentional at all. The "problems" with the scene are so subtle (some would argue non existent) that i imagine the writers didn't even think about the impact it could have.

There are a dozen more controversial scenes/issues within teh show that i absolutely love. First and foremost is the already mentioned violence that Sean displayed.

I by no means think i should dictate what's aired and what isn't. Every artist has their own right to put out there whatever they want. I'm not my brother's keeper.

But, if i'm a fan of a show, I'm going to notice things that I value. And i'm concerned about how entertainment impacts the society that views it. That's all i'm saying. Nip/tuck has done more good than harm, and that's one of the reasons i like it (the most important reason i like it is b/c i'm entertained). It's always a balancing act.

I used to like will and grace, but at some point, the stereotypes became so over the top, that it offended me more than it entertained me. So i stopped watching. I don't think its impact on society is so outrageous that I need to become an activist against it or anything.

With this one scene, all i've done is start a thread on a fan board. Some people have disagreed with me and pointed out things that I've used to redefine my stance. Other people might not have thought about the issue before hand, and now they have (and either decided to agree or disagree with me).

We could all "move on", but I much prefer a continuing dialogue. I think that's where true intellectual progress is made. Again, the only comment that offended me was the "if you don't like it, don't watch". And that has more to do with my life and how people have reacted to my political beliefs (if it's not obvious, i'm "far left" and have been critical of the war, corporate america, etc etc etc).

I disagree with you comparing me to the religous right. Those people want to censure things that offend them. I hate the FCC and have been a strong advocate of the 1st amendment. But, that's a different argument. Everyone should have the right to express whatever they want. I was just pointing out that in this one instance, we should step back and try to understand the impact that it has on society.

Entertainment shapes our belief system. In that one scene, i think that there was some subliminal homophobic tendancies portrayed. I was a little surprised by how universally loved that scene was. When i saw it, i shrugged it off as mildly (ever so mildly) offensive, and just moved on. It was only after i read the reader reviews that i became more concerned.

But, i guess i'm done with the subject. Anything else i say will just be repetitive. I'm really looking forward to tomm's episode where Christian feels the need to hurt other women to mask his own pain. The way christian deals with his pain has been the most fascinating aspect of the show, in my opinion.
love C.T.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 2:46 pm
Those people want to censore things that offend them....
Well, yea if it was a perfect world I wouldn't have to see anything I didn't like or anything I thought was offensive! I am a Christian and I have beliefs and it's ok to have them. In reality no one or no thing is perfect. Just because I have certain beliefs and not afraid to express them make me "one of those people"?? It's like everyone is free to say or do whatever they gay, be a movie star, be married, don't be married, black, white chinease, be a animal activist..or be a hunter..Whatever you get the picture!! But as soon as I say hey I'm a Christian..I'm crazy or I get compared to someone like Jerry Falwell!! WHat the hell is that all about? Don't you realize when you said one of those people, that would be the same as if I said that about a gay person or a person who's black, etc. Someone who is religious does not have to be compared to the one guy who is a whacko job (jerry falwell) just like I wouldn't compare all gay people to Richard Simmons or all athesists to Marilyn Manson. GET IT??? Geeshh!!
And talk about uptight people..your posts don't have a spot of humor to them and look how long they are!!Add a smiley face once in a while and stop being so uptight...SMILE.... .. sorry that the only religious people you have ever talked to make you feel this way...we are not all this way, in fact Christianity teaches the opposite.."love thy neighbor.." You all have been having chats with the wrong people!!!!
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:00 pm
kronic, you are threatening to take away my gold star for intelligent posting! Haha. I really liked your arguments and I agree that media is more meaningful when we discuss its social implications. Homosexuality is adressed in a very refined way on this show most of the time. However I think some of the writer's decisions are made to pander to the lowest common denominator. For me the best example of this is Quentin's bisexuality, not in and of itself, but how it relates to the Carver. The Carver rapes men and women, and Quentin has consensual sex with both, so in MANY people's minds, that means Quentin is the Carver. I can't tell you how furious I was to read many people's posts listing that as a major reason for their Quentin theory, and I had to explain time and time again how rape isn't about sex, blah blah blah...There is a post called "let's put an end to it" somewhere in the Season 3 archives. The point is, people want to be right about their primal beliefs. Homosexuality is still a hot-button issue, and one that many many people are insecure about. The cake tasting scene tried to bring a bit of levity to the debate while, I agree with you, VERY SUBTLY reinforcing that homosexuality is a joke if you're straight. However, I think it was more like "What if we were gay" rather than "My God, we could never be gay, that's horribly absurd." To me, that shows a sensitivity towards the gay community. Honestly, though I consider myself very tolerant and accepting, imagining myself in a gay sexual relationship makes my stomach turn. I should note that I do not have any reaction, positive or negative to other men having gay relationships, only ones that theoretically involve me! When gay men have come on to me, I have had a few reactions like Christian's to Quentin's advance in addition to just saying thanks but no thanks. My point is that they could have handled the cake lady's intimation that they were gay much more brutally, and in most people's minds they would have been right to do so. But they played along and did so with sophistication, both from a character and writer standpoint.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:13 pm
Kronic, I am sorry if I seemed too hostile with my first post. While I still disagree, I now respect and understand your view points.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:28 pm
Kronic - ok I went back and looked. You dont explicitly advocate censoring the scene. My bad. Although I think that was implicit in your remarks. You were saying something is bad about having that scene there. My objections are that its not bad because its showing what people do. Like it or not, there's nothing wrong with scenes that show what people do.

You said the julia violence seen was justified since it showed negative consequences for shaun. Why does it need that justification? If the scene didnt have those consequences, you would disapprove? Men hit their wives all the time without accountability or consequences. It would be wrong for a show to illustrate that? (or at least, you would disapprove). you see thats the part I dont get about your position.

Also, in rereading the your original post, you say no way would s and c ever be mistaken for a gay couple. Part of your justification is that the woman would have been told who the couple really was. Obviously, she was not, that was a basic premise of the scene. She why couldnt she have mistaken them for a gay couple? Because of their manly personalities? Careful now!!! On the topic of propogating stereotypes....ahem.....
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:35 pm
When i typed "religious right", i was thinking of a specific group of religious extremists, not christians in general. Sorry if that term offended you. In truth, i wrote that b/c i couldn't remember which religious fanatic was referenced in the above post. I should have just typed "people like Falwell".
This argument is overrated
Nov 28 - 3:39 pm
Hate to spoil it for anyone, but I don't care because it's important to this argument. You can be mad at me if you like. We will see a man-on-man sex scene on an episode of Nip/Tuck very soon. How homophobic is that? No show on TV has pushed the envelope on homosexuality like Nip/Tuck. We see transsexuals, lesbians, gay men, etc. Now there's going to be man-on-man sex. I know gay rights people have complained for a while that it's ok to show two women kissing/making love but not men. Well, here you go. Don't miss tomorrow's episode, ok?
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:42 pm
If it sounded like i was saying that S/C couldn't be confused for a gay couple, that's not what i meant. I meant that that specific woman probably should have known they were straight b/c the booking was probably done by Kimber (she seemed to be the one in charge of all those things when she was talking with Christian), or, as a practical matter, Christian would have innitially introduced Sean as the stand in.

See, that was my OTHER problem with the scene. It seemed unrealistic. As a practical matter, i don't think that the woman could have been oblivious to Kimber's existence and/or cancelling. In fact, the conversations that she overheard between Sean/Christian involved julia. They were also on their third piece of cake or so. There's a lot of time for interaction between the woman and S/C and i doubt (as a practical/realistic matter) that Kimber's name wouldn't have come up.

Shoot, i can't remember the 2nd part of the question. I don't like how this message board doesn't allow you to see other posts when you are typing. BRB
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:42 pm
Oh, and on Will and Grace. I dont like that show much anymore either. The Jack character is insufferable. Yes he's a blatant stereotype, but I know gay dudes WAY more flaming than him. I find that personality type rather unpleasant.

Grace I just dont think is a good actress, and she doesnt pull off what she's supposed to.

Will could be a good character. But even he succumbs (hehe) to the stereotype all too often. Interrupting a serious conversation to remark about color schemes, etc. pretty pathetic.

The only thing the show has going for it is Karen. Her pill popping drunken shallowness is a scream. And she's a talent, and pulls it off very well.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:53 pm
Ok, the Sean/violence/consequences argument.

Yes, there are men who beat women and never suffer any consequences for their actions. But, we, as viewers, aren't expected to root for them. Sean is the lead character....the protagonist who is generally good, but has flaws (like all people do). If HE was able to get away with the violence without any consequences, it would be hard to root for him.

When Matt discovered Quentin and Julia, he said "comprende esse". That clearly had racial implications. But, it's ok to come from a character such as Matt b/c he's so screwed up and hurt. If Sean was upset that Julia was sleeping with Quentin b/c he was latino, then I'd have an issue with that.

Everything has to be taken in context. Archie Bunker was a revolutionary television character. He was racist, and sexist, and said very hurtful things. But his character was miserable. Did he ever smile once on the show?

In the unaired epsiode of family guy [when you wish upon a weinstein], there were many anti-semetic jokes / stereotypes throughout the episode. But, it was peter saying them. Peter is a bumbling idiot. Thus, when he says them, it's obvious that the writers are showing that such beliefs are unintelligent.

I think we need a new word for "homophobic". Because i don't think that the writers fear homosexuals. I just think there are occassionaly scenes (like the cake one), that are less pro-tolerance/equality than others. There have been many issues reagarding homosexuality throughout the series. Obviously, the writers aren't afraid to address these issues. I just think in this one case, they may have unintentionally promoted a stereotype or implied that it's ok to make fun of homosexuals.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 3:59 pm
oh, two tidbits i forgot:

1) 110% agree that people saying that Quentin's bisexuality makes it more likely that he is the carver is absurd. little old ladies get raped too. It's about power, not sex/attraction.

2) did someone really say i wasn't funny because i don't put smiley faces in my posts or break up my thoughts with jokes? how is that an issue?
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:01 pm
Why would you have an issue with Sean not liking Julia with a latino? That would be realistic. It happens all the time. What would your issue be?

And as for Archie Bunker, you do realize he is one of the most beloved characters in the history of sitcom tv, dont you? He is a character that we all route for. Of course we know his remarks are racist, but we route for him. If Sean roughed up Julia without consequences, we would still route for him. I dont think that would be irresponsible of the writers, nor do I think Norman Lear was irresponsible for creating a lovable racist in Archie Bunker.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:05 pm
If sean was racist and there were no consequences to that, I wouldn't be able to root for him. Can you imagine a show where Ariel's family are the lead characters and you root for them? I couldn't. If Sean was allowed to spew racist statements without it even being addressed (if you notice, nobody commented on Matt's use of comprende esses), then I'd have a problem.

Yes, i know Archie was beloved by the audience. But that was in part b/c he had a family that corrected him, and he was clearly made out to be uninformed and ignorant.

Another example would be Andy Sipowitz. He was racist, but he struggled with those issues and he suffered as a result of his ignorance. That's why I was able to root for him.

EDIT: if Sean roughed up julia in that one instance, and there were no consequences, i would still be able to root for him. In fact, i thought the scene was so powerful b/c i think his reaction was realistic and ALMOST justified (or at least excusable). That's why it was so conflicting as a viewer. I sat there and thought "wow, i should be really upset that he just hit julia", but I wasn't. It was complex and multilayered.

If he came home every night and slapped her around, and there were no other discussions or ramifications of that behavior, then I couldn't root for him.

modified: Nov 28 - 8:07 pm GMT
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:06 pm
Yes, I agree that the bisexuality thing being at all equated with rape is heinous.

It reminds me of discussions about homosexuality and people start equating it with pedophilia.

Or in discussions about sex ed in schools, people equate 'sexually active' with promiscuous.

These are all very different things.

I remember when Basic Instinct came out, there was a big objection in the gay community that the sharon stone's character was a lesbian, one of the few lesbians in a lead role, and they made her a psychopathic killer.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:12 pm
Yes, archie was uninformed and ignorant. But what racist isnt? I think we loved him because we were allowed to see the good person underneath and his racism was an unfortunate product of his enviornment (he was beaten by his father, and brought up around hate).

So often, we're not able to see any good in a racist. Myself included, I dont even try to see the good in hate-based people. I think Archie probably did wonders for helping to combat racism by showing how it can consume a person in spite of good intentions, and that there's a little archie in all of us (especially edith, hehe).
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:12 pm
That's interesting regarding Sharon Stone, b/c i've talked to people who don't want the Carver to be Liz (or, to a lesser extent Quentin) b/c of the same issue. Some people feel that if Liz was the Carver, all the positives that came from her being a strong lesbian character would be wiped out.

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't think the Sopranos are anti-italian-american just because the characters are italian-american.

I think it's almost anti-PC to think that if a gay character happens to also be a killer that it implies that the two characteristics are intertwined. Again, as long as you go above and beyond the generic stereotypes, then you can break away from these characteristics as being defining. I don't vew Liz as a lesbian. I view Liz as Liz, with all of her characteristics. Thus, I won't be offended if she turns out to be the Carver (not to mention i bet a plate of brownies with someone that she is it).
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:14 pm
is Ariel "ignorant" or "uninformed"? I don't know. I think she's very intelligent and has a wealth of knowledge. It's just that she had the ultimate "conclusion" in her head before she applied this intelligence. There's very little of what she said that was incorrect by a factual standpoint.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:16 pm
I haven't seen All in the Family that much, but I always assumed the point was that Archie would appear on the surface to be the leader of the family, the one in control, and the one intolerant of others, but that wasn't the case at all. Edith was mousy, but they were on equal footing to a certain extent. And, the young blood of Meathead and the daughter were taking the power away from him outdated ways.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:26 pm
Fair enough, yes there are many intelligent people who are racist. I guess I was referring to ignorant and uniformed to be just on the race issue itself.

But on this topic, I've always felt racism itself is highly misunderstood. We're all so quick to hate it. And yes, its heinous and toxic. But where does it really come from? Its so utterly prevalent throughout all cultures, it cant just be incidental.

It seems to me that since we know we have a self preservation instinct, and a species preservation instinct, in between the two it seems logical that we also have an ethnocentric 'race preservation' instinct. Of course this is just theory, but it makes sense to me. And how would such an instinct manifest itself? Well, avoiding interracial reproduction would be essential. And how would that be assured? By the cultural evolution selecting in favor of hatred of other races.

Thats just one theory. But as prevalent as it is, it seems that there is a 'natural' aspect to racism. Like its a fundamental part of the human condition. I think only by accepting that its natural to have those feelings can we move past them. Hating the racist just propogates more hate (I'm guilty myself, of course). I think racism perhaps was once necessary in an earlier epoch for the reasons above or reasons like them. But no longer is necessary, but its a legacy that has stuck with our culture. Perhaps continued obscuring of the races will usher in a movement past it. Who knows.

Just my opinion. Nobody be offended please.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:35 pm
I agree that it's "natural". In addition to your self preservation points, I'd also say that insecurity and feeling lonely are also "natural" human conditions. In social situations, it's sometimes easier to feel drawn to people who are "like you". That could mean someone who has the same type of job as you, the same gender, the same race, the same type of upbringing, etc etc.

There is also a correlation between racism and immigration patterns in our country. As another culture/race immigrated, other cultures felt threatened. This was in part do the new competition for jobs and whatnot. When the Irish first started immigrating, they were on the bottom of the totem poll. Right now, Latinos are at the bottom of our country's racist food chain.

This would tie into your theories regarding species' survival instincts. Whether it's the Italian Mafia or the KKK, groups form for their own (perceived) self interest and survival.

You can even extend these ideas to the social contract theory and other areas of sociology.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 4:56 pm
I thought S & C were just acting "loving" in that cake scene. No gender there.
Wil and Grace - What is Karen anyway? BI? Her character is Over the top but I love it.
Sean never hit Julia. He grabbed her by the throat and shoved her into the fridge. Not that that is less severe I just never saw him hit her. And maybe Christian and Sean just don't like Quinten, not bi-sexuals. That's not being homophob although Sean's behavior at the park was questionable if not blatant but that could have been the situation.

modified: Nov 28 - 8:58 pm GMT

modified: Nov 28 - 9:05 pm GMT
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 7:06 pm
Im pretty loose guy, very lightened. Take nothing too seriously, but I can kind of see why someone would have opinions on this matter. For some reason, this episode brought out alot of racial/ethical/gay issues and offensives. Between the cake scene, Ariel's speeches, the black women slavery collectables, Ariels fathers speeches of Wrath, and the sawista earings.. its like damn. did anyone see this coming? Next thing you know you have Matt resembling a skin head showing up at the wedding w/ boots and a fukin sawista earing. Saying 'this is who I am' WTF Now dont get me wrong, I dont have much of a problem w/ it. But its hard not to think about the mixed messages.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 7:14 pm
>>>> Ok, the Sean/violence/consequences argument.

Yes, there are men who beat women and never suffer any consequences for their actions. But, we, as viewers, aren't expected to root for them. Sean is the lead character....the protagonist who is generally good, but has flaws (like all people do). If HE was able to get away with the violence without any consequences, it would be hard to root for him. <<<<

I must have missed the scene where he hit Julia. He grabbed her and pushed her (not good things, granted, but different than hitting). He was in a moment of intense emotional duress to the point of vomiting in the kitchen sink, and collapsing to the floor, sobbing, after she left. That doesn't excuse him, but I do think there's a distinction between that and hitting. (There's no indication Julia was bruised from the encounter, and I've never seen the alledged "dent" in the refrigerator.)

I find it interesting how few people ever go back and mention the fact that Julia throws a coffee mug the length of the kitchen aimed at Sean's head in the pilot episode for a lot less provocation. Just because he ducked doesn't make it any less violent.

He hit Matt, but I won't even go into arguing how many fathers would have when the kid just manhandled his mother. I don't condone domestic violence, but in the two instances where Sean behaves that way, the circumstances were extreme, and he's been on the receiving end of at least one violent action from Julia, just to be fair.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 10:02 pm
All this season I would have paid Sean to hit Matt and Julia.
RE: The Cake scene was overate
Nov 28 - 11:12 pm
I would be very, very happy if Sean and Julia sent Matt off to boarding/military school! He needs it. But as for his neo-nazi gf, I think he's investing his anger of his parents into the hate of nazism... channeling it, if you will. But come on, he HAS TO comprehend that Ariel's family is unacceptable in today's society.
love C.T.
khronic fatigue
Nov 28 - 11:51 pm
It ws me who commented about the smiley faces and humor thing...sorry, I was gettin' pretty heated!! This issue does definitely get people going doesn't it? That's a good thing because someone might be here and change their mind on a certain issue or at least think a little more about it before making up their mind. I think that the thing bout Costa being bisexual does throw people off a little but to try and put the carver/rape thing with being bi is going the wrong way....I think anyone who really likes this show and can join into such an intelligent forum like this would not even be able to do such a thing, I mean , try to link the two issues together. I have seen a few come and go here that do that....
oh, here's a smiley face for you khronic...
love C.T.
kronic fatigue
Nov 28 - 11:52 pm
It ws me who commented about the smiley faces and humor thing...sorry, I was gettin' pretty heated!! This issue does definitely get people going doesn't it? That's a good thing because someone might be here and change their mind on a certain issue or at least think a little more about it before making up their mind. I think that the thing bout Costa being bisexual does throw people off a little but to try and put the carver/rape thing with being bi is going the wrong way....I think anyone who really likes this show and can join into such an intelligent forum like this would not even be able to do such a thing, I mean , try to link the two issues together. I have seen a few come and go here that do that....
oh, here's a smiley face for you kronic...
RE: kronic fatigue
Nov 29 - 12:18 am
If sean and christian acted "black", wouldn't that be racist [and yes, i know saying "acting black" is in and of itself racist. The more accurate description would be poor/urban city/street]? Why is it ok for straight people to act gay? It was meant to be lighthearted and comical. What's funny about acting gay?

It's funny because it's out of character not because they are trying to demean gay people. They were having a good time with the gay thing because they were caught offguard by her assumption. The situation they were put into was lighthearted and comical. Maybe if they acted flamboyant and used lisps it would be a little demeaning but all they did was hold hands and say they loved eachother, which to themselves they found funny.

According to your logic, acting as something you aren't is morally reprehensible? Julian McMahon is Australian and acts American, is that racist? John Hensley is like in his 30s and acts 17, is that wrong? Yeah they didn't joke about those, but it's rediculous to be offended by acting.
RE: kronic fatigue
Nov 29 - 1:37 am
When you really think about it, they weren't acting "gay" they were acting engaged.... LOL.

I watched it again tonight... I really look forward to the new episode!!
Cake scene underrated
Nov 29 - 7:38 pm
Blah blah blah. Someone needs to go smoke a joint...
Have people actually read all the posts in this thread?
I lost interest after about the tenth one.

I can't wait for the bag scene tonight!!!

modified: Nov 29 - 11:40 pm GMT
RE: Cake scene underrated
Nov 30 - 1:49 am
Jesus Christ (sorry all you Christians), but could this have been blown anymore out of proportion???? Dear God help us if Quentin or Liz is the Carver because then everyone will be saying it's offensive to the gay/bi community! It really ticks me off that a gay person or bisexual person is supposed to be so loved and admired otherwise we who dislike a person (not based on their sexual preference) are considered hate mongers even though we may dislike the person and not necessarily their gender. For example, if I got into a fight with a lesbian woman, but not even knowing she was lesbian, it would be considered a hate crime just because she is a lesbian. I think that's obsurd!

I suppose all the gays/transsexuals/bisexuals applauded the scene where Matt was beat to a pulp and pissed on too, right?