Labels: hot stuff, Movies, review, urban legends
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 10:06 AM Labels: beliefs, life, Mankind, Maturity, one, real world, understanding
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 8:07 PM Labels: argument, death, discourse, fallacy, gun culture, policies, politics, rights, unbelievable
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 7:53 PM Labels: dance, electronic, music, pop, review, singing
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 11:17 PM Labels: album review, entertainment, music, song
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 9:33 PM Labels: celebrities, entertainment, fight, public
Karl G. Hall lived life @ 11:42 AM
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Found this on Yahoo! Personals blog. Decided to turn this into a checklist, of Whether Or Not I AM A MAN.You can try it if you want, if you're male.#1. The Communication Style of Man- A man can speak to dogs.YES, I speak to animals in general. Dogs, and hamsters, mainly.- A man listens, and that's how he argues. He crafts opinions. He can pound the table, take the floor. It's not that he must. It's that he can.YES. I guess I can turn your opinion against you, if I must.
- A man can look you up and down and figure some things out. Before you say a word, he makes you. From your suitcase, from your watch, from your posture. A man infers.AMBIGUOUS. I make inferences and assumptions for some, and don't make inferences and assumptions for others.
#2. Man's Ability to Handle Mistakes- A man owns up. That's why Mark McGwire is not a man. A man grasps his mistakes. He lays claim to who he is, and what he was, whether he likes them or not.YES. I lay claim to who I am.
- Some mistakes, though, he lets pass if no one notices. Like dropping the steak in the dirt.YES. Definitely. Why waste food? Though I won't be eating a steak anytime soon.
- A man can tell you he was wrong. That he did wrong. That he planned to. He can tell you when he is lost. He can apologize, even if sometimes it's just to put an end to the bickering.AMBIGUOUS. No. I have to win in an argument. Why argue if I wasn't sure I was absolutely right? At the same time, when I know I'm beat, I'll tell you... I planned to lose. You know, to save face. Face is important.
#3. Man's Basic Instincts
- A man does not wither at the thought of dancing. But it is generally to be avoided.YES. I don't dance. Much. Except do Bunifa impersonations. But that doesn't count. That's a hoedown.
- Style -- a man has that. No matter how eccentric that style is, it is uncontrived. It's a set of rules.YES. Whatever you call what I wear, you can't deny I'm wearing something you're not.
- A man loves the human body, the revelation of nakedness. He loves the sight of the pale bosom, the physics of the human skeleton, the alternating current of the flesh. He is thrilled by the wrist and the sight of a bare shoulder. He likes the crease of a bent knee.AMBIGUOUS. Depends on the quality and type of the body.
- Maybe he never has, and maybe he never will, but a man figures he can knock someone, somewhere, on his bottom.AMBIGUOUS. What the heck?! Don't understand this one.
- A man doesn't point out that he did the dishes.NO. I sooo did the dishes yesterday night.
- A man knows how to ridicule.YES. Oh, YEAH.
- A man gets the door. Without thinking.NO. I'm first out the door, baby!
- He stops traffic when he must.YES. Yes, I can. (See above: The Bunifa Hoedown)
- A man knows how to lose an afternoon. Playing Grand Theft Auto, driving aimlessly, shooting pool.YES. I'm doing this blog post now, aren't I?
- He knows how to lose a month, also.YES. I did this whole blog up, all by myself.
- A man welcomes the coming of age. It frees him. It allows him to assume the upper hand and teaches him when to step aside.YES. Older = better. Only little itty bitty babies like youth.
- He understands the basic mechanics of the planet. Or he can close one eye, look up at the sun, and tell you what time of day it is. Or where north is. He can tell you where you might find something to eat or where the fish run. He understands electricity or the internal-combustion engine, the mechanics of flight or how to figure a pitcher's ERA.AMBIGUOUS. In terms of understanding electricity, engines, flight, YES. I love Physics. Physics is tremendously fun, though exam skills are not. But in terms of geography... absolutely NO. You have clearly not seen me try to find directions. I can't even find directions with a map. I'll probably need a compass too, and even then there are no guarantees.
- A man does not know everything. He doesn't try. He likes what other men know.AMBIGUOUS. I know I don't know everything. But I try. I will pioneer. I will innovate.
- A man knows his tools and how to use them -- just the ones he needs. Knows which saw is for what, how to find the stud, when to use galvanized nails. A miter saw, incidentally, is the kind that sits on a table, has a circular blade, and is used for cutting at precise angles. Very satisfying saw.AMBIGUOUS. Some tools I use, some tools I abhor. Saws ESPECIALLY. Metal teeth give me creeps. Must be because I love reading Stephen King.#4. The Paradox of Man
- He does not rely on rationalizations or explanations. He doesn't winnow, winnow, winnow until truths can be humbly categorized, or intellectualized, until behavior can be written off with an explanation. He doesn't see himself lost in some great maw of humanity, some grand sweep. That's the liberal thread; it's why men won't line up as liberals.- A man resists formulations, questions belief, embraces ambiguity without making a fetish out of it. A man revisits his beliefs. Continually. That's why men won't forever line up with conservatives, either.AMBIGUOUS. I'll answer both at the same time.I am downright a liberal in beliefs. You know that earlier thread about guns? (scroll a bit further down) I found it on ATS, a super-secretive discussion forum discussing conspiracy theories and possible explanations to life's mysteries, December 25 2012, for example. I also realize that the site is full of white men who love to blame the government for everything, who hug their guns (PLURAL) and Bibles (PLURAL too) to sleep every night. They wake up and they blast the first person that walks through the door with another gun. They shoot their dinner. They eat their dinner, RAW. They are on the site because they want to find fault with Obama (one man actually called Obama 'the Antichrist'), and not to find meaning for their lives.You call those men? PLEASE.But at the same time, regarding explanations and the rationality for humanity, I don't dig and dig and try to figure it out. This is life. I won't line up with conservatives in terms of beliefs, that's for sure, but I won't line up with liberals in terms of... always attempting, to do this, to do that.I will TRY some, but this is THE UNIVERSE. It's got its mysteries. We can't ever find all the answers, nor would I want to. What's the point? Everything in life would lose its beauty if we knew everything about life!
#5. Man the Island
A man is comfortable being alone. Loves being alone, actually. He sleeps.YES. Alone = good. Social situations = bad. I sleep. I love to sleep.
- Or he stands watch. He interrupts trouble. This is the state policeman. This is the poet. Men, both of them.AMBIGUOUS. Policeman, not so much. Poet, yes.
- A man loves driving alone most of all.YES. My music, my wheels, my singing, my driving. Freedom. Top down too, hopefully.
- A man watches. Sometimes he goes and sits at an auction knowing he won't spend a dime, witnessing the temptation and the maneuvering of others. Sometimes he stands on the street corner watching stuff. This is not about quietude so much as collection. It is not about meditation so much as considering. A man refracts his vision and gains acuity. This serves him in every way. No one taught him this -- to be quiet, to cipher, to watch. In this way, in these moments, the man is like a zoo animal: both captive and free. You cannot take your eyes off a man when he is like that. You shouldn't. Who knows what he is thinking, who he is, or what he will do next.Have you seen me watching people? I do. I watch, and I come with ideas. I formulate life stories. Drama. The basis of scripts and entertainment. It's important to have thought, to review, to observe, to amass.At the same time, I wouldn't say no to a good conversation. I have a one-track mind (not to be confused with one-goal personality). If you manage to distract me, you will have my attention all the way until something else distracts me.So... it's AMBIGUOUS.So... WHO KNOWS?
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Here's what I found on the Internet, about a certain General Cosgrove in Australia talking about what boy scouts will be doing should they visited the Australian Armed Forces base.FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
"So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?"
GENERAL COSGROVE:
"We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting."
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
"Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?"
GENERAL COSGROVE:
"I don't see why. They'll be properly supervised on the rifle range."
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
"Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?"
GENERAL COSGROVE:
"I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm."
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
"But you're equipping them to become violent killers."
GENERAL COSGROVE:
"Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are
you?"
The radio broadcast went silent for 46 seconds and when it returned, the
interview was over.I hate these kind of people who use such WEAK and UNSUPPORTED FALLACIES to support their stand that children and teenagers should be exposed to guns.IN fact, the entire argument that guns should be exposed to people in GENERAL is weak. Clearly, Columbine hasn't taught us anything.Let me proceed to poke holes in this argument.(I got so furious when I read this interview that I just HAD to blog about it. Not only did he get the whole point wrong, but he was insanely rude to the interviewer too.)1. Can boobs and vaginae kill?Clearly, no. Unless these are poison boobs spewing poison ivy sap, and the vagina of this woman is tipped with razor sharp blades that shred dicks to pieces each time intercourse occurs, female organs cannot be used to kill. "Equipment of a woman" does not a gun make. In fact, quite the opposite. Equipment of a woman is used for more JOYOUS occasions, and not for murder.2. Is it a temptation to use boobs to solve life's problems?Perhaps, for sex. But this brings pleasure to them. Solving a BIT of life's problems. What does gun violence solve? Nothing. And it brings exponentially more social problems than prostitution. 3. Are girls exposed to prostitution early?Well, sure. I mean, unless you're in the child sex trade, or your mother happens to be a hooker herself, girls aren't actively told by people, "Go. Learn how to fuck to make money" when they are 13 or 14. These boys, probably the same age, are being told "Go. Learn how to shoot moving targets" already. 4. Which does nature play a bigger part in?I don't think girls even HAVE the equipment at 13 and 14 to be fully attractive. Just like some boys don't have the equipment at 13 and 14 to kill someone. But then... nature dictates when girls blossom. You can't go to a military base and suddenly come back with big flashing boobies ready to go around and be attractive enough to have mass orgies. However, these boys CAN. Not be able to have hot sex parties, but be able to SHOOT TO KILL.5. Which has been 'glamorized'?I don't even know if 'glamorized' is a word. But this is media-related. Does the media depict prostitution favorably? It depicts SEX favorably. But prostitution, i.e. mass sex (like mass gun-shooting, apparently), is FROWNED upon by the media. I mean, I can only think of a handful of movies that portray sluttiness in a good light. Whereas guns are in nearly EVERY action movie that comes out of Hollywood. Hence, people are more inclined to use guns in this 'glamorous' light. Few people are inclined to slut around having mass sex for pay.6. Do people ask to be shot?Clearly, no. Who in Binghamton's English Language Speaking/Writing skills class raised their hand and declared, "Please, take my life!" NO ONE, and that I can say for certain. Whereas the "victims" of prostitution, the people who have sex with the prostitute, probably ASKED for it. They PAID for it. It's probably fully consensual. They KNOW what they're doing. They're fully aware that they're having intercourse, and they DO NOT OPPOSE.7. Is there such thing as a professional shooter?Oh, yeah, there is. Professional Olympic shooter. Professional crow shooter. Professional pigeon shooter. Similarly, there is a professional sex worker, i.e. a prostitute. But wait wait, where in this list is there a "Professional human shooter?" Even criminals on death row don't die by shooting. There is NO such profession that exchanges the act of shooting humans for money.8. What are the odds of depressed women becoming prostitutes?High, you say? Well, I would think that depressed women are more likely to kill themselves. First, kill their husbands. Kill their bosses. Kill their bullies. THEN will they kill themselves. They won't turn to prostitution as a means to resolve their depression. I mean, I guess it's POSSIBLE. But you'd have to be really, really... weird in a horny sort of way.9. How many people have the ABILITY to be prostitutes?Not everyone has what it takes to be a prostitute. You gotta have a smokin' body. You gotta have contacts. You gotta hustle. You gotta know tricks. You gotta get the max $$ for your services. You gotta know your math. You gotta know how to keep people coming (no pun intended). You gotta know how to stop unfavorable comments and to improve. As for shooting... well, as far as I know, in some Southwestern states you just go to a gun shop, buy a gun, check your mental HISTORY, register, and BAM! You're all set to kill! There's not even a need to improve! Just do what Jiverly Wong or Cho Seung-Hui did and EMPTY your rounds! Few people will escape THAT sort of rapid-fire!10. Accidents can happen.Now, here I'm deviating a little from the conversation between Cosgrove and the interviewer. She asked if he was "equipping them to be violent killers". Now, assuming this violent killing is ACCIDENTAL, i.e. teen boy plays with gun, shoots his father in the chest, we open up a whole new Pandora's Box worth of arguments. How many women can say that they "accidentally" prostituted themselves? NOT ONE. This I'm certain of as well. It's pretty self-explanatory.Prostitution is a rational choice, or a SEMI-rational one.Massacring a large group of people with an AK-47 is NOT a rational choice.IN SUMMARY1. These women don't use their prostituting to cause death. 2. They do not turn to prostitution as a quick means to get rid of the people that caused them to lose their jobs (GET OVER IT, losers!). 3. They are not fully exposed to the idea of using sex to earn money at age 14. 4. Sexual growth and being "equipped" is a natural process. 5. Prostitutes aren't portrayed glamorously (only two films do: The Black Dahlia and Sin City) and hence mass sex will not be imitated by curious teenagers, unlike those who want to "feel what it's like to shoot a gun at someone". 6. People do not ask to be killed. They ask for sex. 7. They PAY for sex, i.e. it's a service. 8/9. Depressed woman may not have the ability or train of thought to be prostitutes. Depressed people HAVE the ability and train of thought to shoot someone violently.10. People can "accidentally" shoot someone and kill him.10 arguments that effectively DESTROY this poor analogy. Also, I cannot stand how rude he was to the interviewer. I have utmost respect for Australian forces and General Cosgrove is probably one of the most capable and effective officers to serve your country, evident from his endless awards, but from this conversation, I can tell that he really doesn't know how to construct a counter-argument. But why is that so?Because in the first place, the argument for gun ownership is WEAK. Rights and all (ra ra second amendment) is really NOT an argument. Yeah, human rights IS important, but for the life of me, I cannot connect the link between owning a gun and having rights. Does owning a gun mean you are human? Do you own a gun just because you can? Where's the rationality in that? Human rights is when you do not repress someone. That another person can speak out, freely, without repercussion (First Amendment). That another person's possessions and territory cannot be infringed upon (Fourth Amendment). That another person cannot be imposed upon, and has his own rights to be a person (Ninth Amendment).And yet, the Second Amendment, clear as it is, states that every citizen of USA has the "right to keep and bear arms". IMO, an absolutely pointless amendment.Now, I love America, don't get me wrong, I think it's a land of the free, and beautiful, and all things natural and artistic and kind, but this amendment and its uselessness is causing the image of beautiful USA to be tainted. I mean, it's a different situation if your job requires you to have protection (policemen etc.) but if you're a citizen what do you need a gun for? Protection? What would happen if ALL guns were confiscated? Well, that would be a lot less protection you'd need. If you happen to run into someone who smuggled a gun in illegally and decided to threaten you with it, well then, count yourself unlucky.But I daresay, so many less people will decide to take a gun into a community center and kill 13 people. So many less teenagers/college students will decide to take a gun into campus and massacre the cliques typical and substantial to every school. And yet I understand that that doesn't mean they will lose access to guns COMPLETELY (even if firearms are banned in general). There will be the few Americans who will REFUSE to hand over their guns, and scream "Rightssss!!!! MY RIGGGHHHTTTSS!!!" all the way to the grave. There will be the few reckless teenagers who will get a gun from their "cousins" to keep "for fun", and end up using them when depressed. But rather than say this is a weakness of my proposed change...I would say THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS and PERMEATING PROBLEM. If guns were so widespread you could get them underground? If Mexicans could come in from down south fully armed and high? These are all serious problems. And one which not even BANNING guns can solve.So we need a BETTER COURSE OF ACTION. President Obama has been so focused on Muslim ties, saving the economy, saving the climate and environment, stopping terrorism, that I understand gun laws is not a big priority on his list. But I'm still hoping that when things... settle down a bit, he can come up with a real plan to tackle all these problems.But I digress. Firstly, this abovementioned interview is in Australia, and I don't know much about their laws, so I can't comment further beyond the FALLACIOUS LOGIC of General Cosgrove's counter-argument. Secondly, I actually just wanted to comment on the senseless analogy alone, but ended up going off on a rant about gun laws in the US.See how much I hate guns? With knives, fists, broken glass bottles and ropes, victims have a better chance to live in a one-on-one confrontation. Without guns, 32 people could not have died within a span of a couple of hours in Virginia Tech. Probably 2 would have died. Not 30. And definitely not within 100+ minutes.Before you try to defend guns, please THINK. Please think how well your argument stands in light of such information. Example:"Guns don't kill humans, HUMANS kill humans" is a common argument I hear from proponents of gun enthusiasts. But, think. Humans may kill humans, but guns make it WAY easier. Not just to kill, but to kill in huge numbers and in very rampant ways. How could Michael McLendon kill 10+ people WHILE DRIVING on the road if he did not have the help of a gun? Yes, human psychology is the underlying cause of all these deaths, but in the end, human psychology just provides INTENT. Guns provide the MEANS. The big ol', massive, unbelievably destructive MEANS. Without the MEANS, INTENT will forever remain INTENT. INTENT will be at best, stuck in the head, at worst, result in one or two people dead (that rhymed, weirdly).Think about this. Think about all of the arguments in this post. I usually don't blog so rampantly in recent times, but that interview strangely just... made me so mad and sad at the same time. Think about it. For the immigrants. For the college students. For the greater good of various residents all over the WORLD. P.S. If you have any counter-arguments that really hold weight, please leave a tag on my blog. if you also have any knowledge or understanding about gun laws in other countries, Australia, for e.g. please enlighten me. I don't want to go Googling when I have SATs to prep for. I know, i'm lazy. But, hey, I put in effort for this post. P.P.S. Hopefully people read this and discourse with me. This is an issue I have passion for and a problem I really want to change in the long run, with various laws and implementations. I won't change the Constitution (unlike gay rights opposers), and banning is really a last resort... but if ever I became a politician, rest assured this would be no 1 on my priority list, and I will find some way, nook or cranny, to curb this terrible trend.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Right here is my list for the 15 musically most exciting songs for the dance/electro-pop/house genres! This also marks the first time I'm blogging in over...THREE WEEKS.(whoa)I've always had a list for the most exciting songs that influence me, across all the main genres of music, but I don't post them up on my blog or put them into playlists on itunes, Last.fm, WMP or imeem, for example, because to me, this list was more of a mental thing and less of a "hard-and-fast-stick-to-it-when-planning-music-for-atmosphere" rule of thumb.But recently, I had to plan a little party for a friend leaving to America (coincidentally also her Bday), and I ran into a little trouble with music planning. Hence, came in this list...(say the following ten times fast)Presenting the 15 Most Exciting Songs in the Dance/Electropop/House genre that should really be considered when you're planning a party:Dance/Electropop/HouseMY FIFTEEN MOST EXCITING SONGSMetro Station - Shake ItTwo Words: 'Shake it'Fatboy Slim - Rockefeller SkankTwo Words: 'Massive classic'Hellogoodbye - Dear Jamie... Sincerely MeTwo Words: 'Damn long'Daft Punk - Digital LoveTwo Words: 'Innovative fun'Bob Sinclair - Love Generation (S&B Mix)Two Words: 'African flavor'BT - SomnambulistTwo Words: 'Animalistic imagination'BT - Superfabulous (feat. Rose McGowan Album version)Two Words: 'Hollywood attitude'Telepopmusik - AnywayTwo Words: 'Heartfelt reflections'Telepopmusik - Breathe (2003 Mix)Two Words: 'Mysterious mastery'Paul Oakenfold - Ready Steady GoTwo Words: 'Bloodpumping Action'Paul van Dyk - WatersTwo Words: 'Ambient beauty'Lady GaGa - LovegameTwo Words: 'Sick beat'Lady GaGa - Just Dance (ft. Colby Adonis)Two Words: 'Instantaneously catchy'Jamiroquai - Seven Days in Sunny June (Album version)Two Words: 'Unbridled freedom'Madonna - Hung Up (Tracy Young Groove Edit shortened)Two Words: 'Soon-to-be classic'Now let's take a look at some of these songs, in their accompanying music videos, because that is when you truly get the feel of the music.And by the way, I'm going to redo the layout of this blog for the 2009-2010 years. So if the videos arent the right size, don't fret. Things are gonna change soon.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
A review of: Kelly Clarkson's comebackAll I Ever WantedKelly ClarksonRCA Records (2009)When I first heard "My Life Would Suck Without You", I HATED it. God, I absolutely detested it. I hated it so much that each time it came up on the radio, or on XM, or on Ryan Seacrest's AT40, I would curse, swear, and mute the radio for the exact duration of the song (3'32").Now, however, the song has grown on me. This is one of the songs that will evoke a clear response: Either you love it, or you hate it. And if you loved it, listening to it often enough will make you hate it. If you hated it in the first place, listening to it often enough will make you love it to bits.I'm not in the 'love it to bits' category yet, but I'm on my way. It's surprising, really, that such manufactured pieces from All I Ever Wanted could even have any effect on me. Usually studio trickery in "I Want You" and "Save You" wouldn't have touched me one bit, but with Kelly's vocals the final products don't seem cheesy, but very... proper. Acceptable. Good, even.Of course, now that Kelly's gone the My December route two years ago, she's learned not to relinquish her creative control, and many songs now feature measures of introspection and reality, unlike in Thankful, where there was only one (Beautiful Disaster) and in Breakaway, where there were only two (Because of You and Where Is Your Heart, coincidentally also written by Chantal Kreviazuk). On this fourth album, there are FOUR power ballads, like "Cry", a major country-styled Reba-ish song, Already Gone, Save You and "If No One Will Listen"."Already Gone", in particular is in a whole new league of its own from the rest of the album, because it's co-written by Ryan Tedder, and so features his trademark crescending drum-percussion combinations found in popular-er songs like Bleeding Love, Better In Time and Halo, which fits Clarkson in a totally different (new!) style from Leona and Beyonce.Other standouts include "Impossible", a very Metro-Station sounding track, "I Want You", a very 50s-Archies-meets-Beach Boys-meets-Duffy (especially the 'Yeah-yeah-yeah's) sort of song, and "Whyyawannabringmedown", a super hard-rock gym-pumping song reminiscent of a cross between Fall Out Boy and The All-American Rejects.Then there's "Ready", by far, the BEST song in the whole album, but only because of it's total irreverence, fun and production typicality. It's so damn familiar, because the layouts and progressions are staples in pop songwriting. It's best described as a mix of: Sara Bareilles (the whole of the first verse), Pink (the first bridge), The Feeling (the first chorus), Barenaked Ladies (second verse), Katy Perry (in fact from 2'00" to 2'20" Kelly sounds EXACTLY like Katy), Natasha Bedingfield (toward the end). Basically, a giant medley of various flavors. Then there are the "typical songs" that will never make any dents in the music industry, because of how BORING and BLAND they are, like "All I Ever Wanted", "Don't Let Me Stop You", and "Long Shot" (which no amount of violin backings can save).All in all, it's a good mix of songs, a pretty cool variety, and a good buy. Especially from itunes (now that I'm an Apple convert), you can get the exact songs you want, so you can skip some of the lousier ones. Ones to get... well, you've read this review haven't you!
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Let me talk some about the whole Rihanna and Chris Brown issue.There has been so much chatter about the poor girl who was battered violently by her boyfriend Chris Brown after a whole argument about Paris Hilton/Leona Lewis/unknown Canadian singer interacting with Brown. You would have known just the extent of how HORRIBLE the whole situation is, unless you've been living under a rock.Now, honestly, to put it nicely, no one should care.Seriously.It's a domestic affair. An in-house battle between Barbadian and Brown.But of course, as is the issue with all celebrities, nothing is ever domestic anymore.Recently, an article reported that Rihanna and Chris are back together barely WEEKS after the whole hoo-hah began in the first place, and that even though Chris is seeking counselling and whatnot, Rihanna has forgiven him.
Photo from TMZ.comHoney, you should NEVER forgive anyone who does THAT to you.But again, it's not my place to speak.It's not anyone's place to speak.Of course, we all have our own thoughts. We all support Rihanna, or in the case of Diddy and Kanye, support Chris. We all have our own takes on what happened. But when we see evidence of abuse on strangers, we don't go up to them and criticize them, should they choose to reconcile with their abuser. We only do that with friends, or family, or people who've known us long enough to trust that they would trust our words and advice. But with this case... Rihanna and Chris are seemingly EVERYONE'S friends or family. Everyone now has a stake in the most high-powered music couple in the world (sorry, Jay/Beyonce) and want Rihanna to leave Brown. It's real-life drama, but we don't know any of them to be truly concerned, but at the same time, we know enough of them to pass our "wisdom".Phrases like these: "Disgusted with women like this..." and "Disappointed in her..." say nothing. Why should I be disappointed in Rihanna? Her personal life is not of any concern to me. Unless she comes up with another song like Rehab, which is basically 5 minutes of a complete and utter waste of time, anything she does in her daily life cannot and should not disappoint me.It's easy for normal people to say, "Oh, I'm disappointed in her" and "Abusive me all over the world are rejoicing right now", but think about this on a higher level please: What Chris Brown does cannot and should not influence men all over the world.Now, I'm not saying men (humans, in general) are not easily influenced. If you know me, you know just how misanthropic I am. What I'm saying is, one single incident like this is nothing to abusive men. They get their power from their weak, spineless, subservient spouses. They get their power from the endless scripted television series portraying the weaker woman (exclude the following: Dirty Sexy Money, Cashmere Mafia, Lipstick Jungle, Sex and the City, Desperate Housewives, Army Wives). They get their power from the women who DO NOT heed the well-meaning advice of family and friends, and from the news reports and talk shows who showcase these women repeatedly, and from the "BUDDIES!" and "DOOODES" who knock back scotch-and-sodas and pat them on the backs for a slap well-executed.They don't get their affirmation and power from Chris Brown. Stories like Chris and Rihanna's actually deter them, because negative light is shed on the whole issue. And if there's one thing I know about humans, it's that they never want to be in negative light. All humans constantly seek approval.If their spineless, subservient spouses aren't speaking up, it means they approve (or, do not DISAPPROVE). More power to the typical, jock-ish, burly, uneducated men (Chris included).And one more thing. If Rihanna gets beat up again by Chris Brown... that's her business. It's not MY face that's getting beat on. It's not MY career. It's not MY boyfriend. I know, you say that sounds selfish, but for God's sakes it's Rihanna. She's not the poor Latina always hobbling to the grocery store because her husband sprained her ankle by kicking her when she's loading the dishwasher. Rihanna HAS power. She HAS the ability to kick Chris' butt. And if she doesn't,that doesn't mean she's setting a poor example or being a bad role model. She's not even a role model or example IN THE FIRST PLACE. What's she doing now is what she thinks is right, and well, who are we to tell her what's right? Celebrity or not, everyone should do what they think is right. If anything, the only people that should be disappointed are fellow women with power like Beyonce and Oprah and Tyra and Whitney.Meanwhile, we should only be disappointed by the close friends and family who refuse to step away and kick butt when they had the CHANCE to. Because they are like us. Because they are connected to us. Because we know them, and we give them advice, but they just refuse to listen, goddamn it. We're not giving them "advice" over a gossip forum.Am I encouraging a division between celebrity and the "normal" people? Yes. The divide has always been there. Just because now the celebrity is showing signs of being capable of "normal" domestic disputes doesn't make them any less "celebrity". They are the unique class of people who are both "normal" and "special" at the same time. Paparazzi's still after them. Photos of their disfigured faces are kept VERY TIGHTLY under wraps. They are not politicians, who are classified solely under the "special" category (case in point: Obama, Sebelius, Clinton, Snowe, Locke, Palin, Bush) or fashion designers, also solely under the "special" category (case in point, The NAMES: Versace, LV, Ralph Lauren, Armani). They are also not sportsmen, "special" as well (van Koeverden, Sharapova, Phelps, Florence, Jankovic, Williams). These people, sportsmen, designers, politicians, are role models BY DEFAULT.They are ENTERTAINMENT celebrities, and what us, as the "normal", should really be looking out for are their products. What they put out into the world. Entertainment, duh. Movies. Music. Television. Sketches. Fashion showcases. Being pop culture icons.Unless they proclaim themselves role models, i.e. Bono/The Edge/Larry Mullen Jr./Adam Clayton, then there is no reason to treat them as role models. Hence, there is no reason to care.
Wish To-Do List 2008