serious internet roundup. or not.

lexy: you slept with george?! [death glare from christina] oh, no talking unless it's medical.
[meredith walks away]
lexy: so, medically, meredith and george had... sexual... intercourse?

hahahaha. my students also like to say "intercourse" when they're trying to be polite and classy. as in, when they want to be class-appropriate. but when have i EVER used that word? seriously. and did everyone know that outercourse is a thing?

wait, no. this was supposed to be a things that happened on the internet roundup. let's see...
baseball commentary is sexist. oh yeah?
michelle obama is classy. and i know someone who knows someone who met her yesterday. I'M JUST SAYIN.
related - it's possible our president is the cutest president in history.
it's iced coffee weather. hellz yeah it is.
advice for young feminists looking for jobs - or for young d0-gooders, i think.
worth noting that i've seen a lot of inspirational catholic vote videos, but i didn't see this one coming.
subways, worldwide, drawn to scale - this is FANTASTIC. worth a click. i don't know why i find it so awesome, but i do.

but, most importantly - the little mermaid came out 20 years ago. is it a coincidence that i just made a little mermaid reference this week? or do i just love it that much? right. and try this quotation, guys, it's often useful - "isn't it obvious, daddy? ariel's in loooove."

genderize!

remember when i didn't want to get mad at freakonomics? right.

so they want to know whether mcdonalds asks you if you want a boy or girl toy.

How do you feel about these questions? McDonald’s has to balance giving detailed information about toy promotions that change every few weeks against the difficulties of training and wanting to keep the line moving. But the lawyer in me also notes that several states prohibit sex discrimination at public accommodations.

lots of comments. some of them upsetting. sigh. first of all, yes, you are discriminating if you define "girl toys" and "boy toys" [and it's easy not to], and the fact that there are girl and boy sections in toy stores and clothing stores doesn't prove non-discrimination. it proves that discrimination is pervasive.

sure, many girls want the doll and many boys want the hot wheels. but that's not all it is. i worked in the baby section of a department store, guys, and the only things that might pass for gender-neutral, even for INFANTS, were the winnie-the-pooh line of sleepers. so, people who shopped there were gender-izing their babies. probably not because the babies liked it. seriously, people would come in and be like, "umm. we don't know the sex of the baby yet." and i'd be like, "have you considered the winnie-the-pooh sleepers? otherwise, decide if your fetus likes flowers or trucks."

possible reasons for this: 1. people want strangers to know if their baby is a boy or a girl. 2. retailers want people to buy new clothes for their opposite-gender future babies. but still, how can you define what girls should be and what boys should be and then claim that you're not discriminating? how can you say that it's fine for you, or for your kids, and so it has to be fine for everyone?

sigh.

and, hey. speak from the i. and i will say, now, that i like to eat happy meals, and i've never been asked what kind of toy i want. as a child, i liked both barbies and ninja turtles, and mom usually asked for two different toys so brother and i wouldn't steal each other's... [that is, so i wouldn't steal his when mine broke. sigh.]

i'm also mad that people [again, commenters] think questions on the citizenship interview are funny. sigh. it's hard to get citizenship here, guys. and it's all so odd, anyway. it's easy to be born here [you know, for me] but hard to get in... it's easy to have a baby, but not so easy to adopt one...

anyway, i've worked out my issues. i'm mad at the commenters. freakonomics is apparently ready for all kinds of comments, but then, i guess that's the process...

wings = hope.

"sure they're messy, but so is democracy."

commonweal again, i know. but it's good. kaveny is brilliant and LOVES colbert.

this is like the rant i have about huck finn being the great american novel. it's a mess. it's a story about thinking your prejudices are right, and then being transformed - almost. it ends unrealistically happily, and as the reader you're like, "wait, that would never happen. nothing's that good." but we're trying...

yup, just in time for the super bowl. and all this talk about whether we like the super bowl [actually, kind of a sweet piece about sports and family, and even baseball] makes me think of a time we all sat down to watch the super bowl with a huuuuge bowl of delicious snack mix. the snack mix was gone before the first quarter was over - at which point my little brother [age 3] goes, "what happened to the SUPER BOWL?!"

priorities in order, folks. stay tuned for my favorite commercials as i root against the steelers.

jezebel keeps making my computer freeze up. WTF, jezebel and your multimedia.

"and knowing is half the battle."

via today's the stranger slog:



things i love about this:
1. the notorious abandoned refrigerator. these must have been everywhere in the 80s. remember when cherie on punky brewster almost died in one of these, too?
2. the huge stache on GI joe. nice.
3. of course, the fact that knowing is half the battle.

300th post! wooooosh.

and, now i'm mad - you can't just take away apostrophes, guys!
also, a potato bug will follow you home unless you buy me this tote bag.

"have you blogged about casseroles yet?"

why, no! i haven't!

i sent an email to my lunch friends [we alternate days bringing lunch for everyone, and yes, it rules] explaining that i'm living out my 20-something rebellion by baking lots of casseroles, because my mom would never let us eat that stuff when we were little. i mean, she would cook chicken. and rice. and vegetables. and more vegetables. and lots of vegetables. but everything was separate, and healthy, and there was NO velveeta or cream of anything soup to be found anywhere. IMAGINE. so now i'm cooking with all those things. in ONE BIG DISH. covered with bread crumbs. take that, mom.

ahhh, rebelling against great parents. what can you do?

but i love the "you should blog about this" compliment. really? you think i'm funny enough to be published instantly online? OKAY! [speaking of which, same friend gave me this, which is kind of weird - it's like a blog, only old-school! because it's a newspaper.]

i'm watching the friends where monica goes to dance class to find the woman who stole her credit card. i don't think credit card thieves actually, you know, go out in public and socialize using the name of the person whose credit card they stole, but i guess this was before the internet and all. i do love the part where the fake monica hates dead poets' society so much that it makes her decide to, you know, SEIZE THE DAY. because she wasted so much of her life watching that movie. well-played, friends.

and, related time-wasters, from nbc local news tonight:
"i look at the governor these days, and all i can think of is britney spears... when she was unraveling... so i just don't know what to expect next..."
speaking of precision of language - ALL you can think of is britney spears? really? and you're afraid he'll unexpectedly release a comeback album?

also, the new head of chicago public schools is the former head of the CTA [since, yet again, someone close to me got hired by obama]. yes, this seems especially relevant to my life. but i still hate the local news.

sorry about all the links to my own blog. i can't stop.

"the pamchenko? no way. it's too dangerous!"

someone recently asked me how often i blog. well. the answer, apparently, is that it depends on the week. so, some thoughts while i sit on the couch, watching the cutting edge. interspersed with thoughts about the movie.

first of all, how creepy is the dad in this movie? "excuse me, honey, while i pressure you and demean you and take charge of your entire life." and how blatant is the sexual innuendo? and how much of it totally passed me by when i first saw this at age ten?

TWO of my former congressmen are now working for obama. clearly, he loves me. big week big week - and i had one of those nostalgic experiences watching the inauguration on a fuzzy tv in the campus ministry office, then running down to class to listen to the rest of it on the radio. [remember the radio?] then we did this lesson from teaching tolerance about inaugural prayer. [click through for a pdf of inaugural pray-ers in history, too.]

i love that part of the movie on new year's eve when they're about to kiss, and you know it because there are SPARKLERS in between their faces. hahahahahahaha. i also love when they kiss at the end of their routine at the end. why don't we see more of that at the olympics?!

my favorite sean casey is retiring! to work for the MLB network! whoa.

no doubt, my favorite part of this movie is the part where she takes the tequila shots. i think of this literally [yes, LITERALLY] every time i take tequila shots. mostly because the first time i saw it i was like, what the hell is she doing? and why is she wearing sunglasses the next day?

a quick search reveals that i blog about misuse of the word literally all the time. seriously. [if anyone's counting, i use "seriously" much more than "literally." what, you don't spend as much time searching my blog as i do? silly.]

new under "things i like" - passive-agressive notes and the flickr page on pointless road signs. this one is definitely my favorite.

toepick!

"Think of it as a one-night stand with someone you know."

hey, guys! we're famous. some interesting stuff in the new york times...

first, this one on how the delay in adulthood affects organized religion. [i found one of those "note to self: find this article" things on my computer recently, and hey, it's really interesting.]

Today, many young people spend more than a decade between high school and marriage “exploring life’s many options in unprecedented freedom.” And, it should be added, in great uncertainty.

and this one on how we don't date anymore.

Under the old model, you dated a few times and, if you really liked the person, you might consider having sex. Under the new model, you hook up a few times and, if you really like the person, you might consider going on a date.

it's weird to read about this stuff in the paper, hmm?

i was talking to my dad on the phone about how i bought myself a new ipod today [yellow! nano!] and felt kind of bad buying something big for myself at christmas. [even though i waited until my old one really, really died.] then he told me a story about one time in the eighties when they were all going to buy stuff for themselves for christmas, or something - and i was like, "wait, 'greed is good' was real? i thought it was just something people wrote about in the paper!"

it's almost like these columnists are really on to something.