Skip to content

Month: July 2008

Review: Wild Hogs

I get the feeling that the producer was sitting in his Valley living room, thinking that he should finally make that Gay Sex Farce he’d been planning to make for years and said to himself (or herself I didn’t check) that they should forget about using twinks and go straight for middle aged actors.  When they couldn’t get real middle aged porn actors to star in their Gay Sex Farce, they decided to call in some Scilon help and cast John Travolta.

One 70s star doesn’t really make a great Gay Sex Farce, so they decided to cast another actor who had (under duress) looked for comfort in the arms of another man.  That way they would have at least one Camp actor and one “Butch” actor in the bunch.  Then they hired a nerd and a black guy to round out the cast.

So, with a cast in place an a loose plot involving a road trip for middle aged motorcycle enthusiasts escaping their wives for the week and discovering their intimate feelings ROAD HOGS, the Gayest Gay joke ever was in production.  Except the title was changed to Wild Hogs so it would not be so obviously Gay.

The whole movie seems to be one long Gay Joke, I’d have taken it for a Gay Sex Farce if it wasn’t for the fact that the Gay part is treated as if it is poisonous radioactive waste, instead of a campy joke.  If I remember correctly this film-opus to the Carry-On films was number one in the box office when it was released.  It was only pushed out of the top spot by “300” where shirtless Spartans opiled up and beat an army sensless with their pecs for a couple of hours.

I have to admit that I had a couple genuine laughs during this, much as I did during “Norbit” but this really was a fairly crappy, homophobic pile of crap.  I think that one might have to take leave of their senses to spend money on this one.  Avoid, watch the Carry On films instead, at least the Camp Sex Farces are kind of funny.

Never let it be said that do not also blow with the wind

I don’t know if you’ve seen this video yet, and wonder if I should even be posting it, but I find it so uplifting that I want to share it with you too. If you’ve had some bad news recently you should watch this. Maybe you’ll feel inspired?

Yeah, I’m making a links post, but why not? It’s Sunday. I got the car cleaned out, but didn’t clean the exterior…. what a goof. It looks like Monday should be nice, so cleaning it in the evening won’t be a problem.

If you’re not already listening to Maestro Fresh Wes, you didn’t click that link and I’m already gone.

A web Poll made me curse

The Money Quote about the Poll results:

No one spread the word as effectively as the man who tops the list. In early May, the Top 100 list was mentioned on the front page of Zaman, a Turkish daily newspaper closely aligned with Islamic scholar Fethullah Gülen. Within hours, votes in his favor began to pour in. His supporters—typically educated, upwardly mobile Muslims—were eager to cast ballots not only for their champion but for other Muslims in the Top 100. Thanks to this groundswell, the top 10 public intellectuals in this year’s reader poll are all Muslim. The ideas for which they are known, particularly concerning Islam, differ significantly. It’s clear that, in this case, identity politics carried the day.

When I read the poll results (without first reading the above paragraph) I was nearly apoplectic that someone described as a muslim Televangelist was rated higher than Richard Dawkins, and that Al Gore was on it at all… phew.  I was up in arms over it, at least emotionally.

This is one of those times when one has to examine their personal prejudices and determine if your reaction is to the “Islam” or to the “Religious” part of it.  Did I react badly because the top ten are foreign and unknown to me or because they are overwhelmingly Muslim?  This is a troubling line of questioning, isn’t it?  I guess if you are conservative and wrong, the answers are easy here, but when you are a thinking liberal who has to examine the whole list and determine what you think of it, the answers aren’t as easy.

It seems that the top ten list is made up of religious personalities, akin to the list being full of American Televangelists and the Pope.  This kind of framing, in my mind, puts to rest any queasiness I have about the list and of course the fact that it was made via open public gaming of the poll makes it even less troubling. Imagine if Free Republic and Stormfront had come out in force to vote on the list?  I imagine that personal politics would color it there too.

So, in the end.  Am I being racist in my reaction to this list.  Most likely, there is certainly a strong xenophobic bent in my initial reaction that can’t be passed of as me immediately noting the religious trappings of the top ten, but I went on and read the list and tried to gain a better understanding of how it came about and used reason over emotion to judge it.  I think that is the best we can hope for, that reason is our fallback plan when we think our emotions are overwhelming us.

Also, Stephen Colbert is the “write in” winner.  I think we can put this list to bed as “typical web poll garbage” and sleep easier for it, or at least congratulate the voting public for having their voice heard.

Twitter Updates for 2008-07-02

  • The Science Gets Done…. #
  • Waiting for my paycheque. This part of my job sucks. #
  • Congratulations Josie, Way to Go! #
  • Is Symantec Web Security officially Dead? #
  • @stephthegeek Good luck on your movie Steph! #
  • @stephthegeek Oops, I mean “move” #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

When under Siege, Tell Jokes about their Moms

There has been a bit of tit-for-tat over Boing-Boing and Violet Blue, that I’m not really commenting on now, I’m actually interested in the bahvior of a couple of mods on the site and their interaction with visitors over this whole thing:

Well, someone there has certainly deleted at least one of mine. Do you have my history at your fingertips?

Yes. You had one comment about Violet Blue that was unpublished because it was in a different thread. We don’t delete comments.

Taken From:

This is about the Boing-Boing “We don’t delete, we unpublish” deal that is going on, and Antinous has hit the nail on the head, the Boingers (and their Internet White Knights) seem to miss.  When something is removed from public access on the web, it has been deleted.  Just because the delete button wasn’t used, doesn’t make the person accusing you of deleting it wrong, just semantically different.

Then he comes back with zingers like:

Perhaps you should read the Moderation Policy.

Which just feeds the damn fire.

Antinous and TNH are both acting like they are personally under attack (right from the beginning, before they started calling people out I mean) and have failed to separate themselves from Boing Boing as an entity.  It’s easy for an individual to take an assault on their employer or community as a personal insult, it’s another thing to start calling your customers (and that’s what readers of boing boing are) idiots and malcontents in a public forum.  In the end Boing Boing is a money-making enterprise and having it’s employees activily insult customers is egregiously silly.

Now here is a Comment to Watch:

OK, seriously, I’m done with this site

In light of recent activites on your website ‘’, I no longer wish to be associated with the site in any way.
I hereby request that you cease and desist using my comments or screenname on the site. Please ‘unpublish’ ALL of my comments and delete my ‘happy mutants’ profile, screenname: ‘sexyrobot’

thank you.

according to your policy page: “When readers contribute content to our sites, you retain ownership of the copyright, and you also grant permission to us to display and distribute it.”

so yeah, i’m invoking the first part of that, but not the second. why? because your policy page has been invalidated by this clause:
Changes in This Privacy Statement
If we decide to change our privacy policy, we will post those changes to this privacy statement, THE HOMEPAGE
(my caps, your words), and other places we deem appropriate so that you are aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it.

specifically as it pertains to this recent addition NOT posted to THE HOMEPAGE:
We reserve the right to unpublish or refuse to unpublish anything for any or no reason
which, in light of recent events, I find morally reprehensible and displaying a lack of journalistic ethics so atrocious I no longer wish to have any association, however marginal, with your site ‘’ Please remove my profile, please remove my comments…all of them. I fully realize this may totally bork the continuity of your comments threads, but maybe you should of thought of that before shovelling posts down the memory hole.

thank you

If it is still there later, more blog drama to ensue.