Blogically Speaking

Blogic of the day: Troubling ceilings

Tue, 26 Jul 2011 11:41:12 -0700

We thought there was nothing more depressing than the glass ceiling… but we could have been wrong.

PS. Number of times one needs to write “ceiling” before it no longer looks like a real word: 5.

Did you miss us?

Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:39:04 -0700

Because we missed you! (Whilst we wandered about Europe.)

Inane Bloggers for Prom Peasantry: Normative Gender Roles for the Royal Court

Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:46:56 -0700

True Life: I Was A Prom Queen Runner-Up and Lost

There’s so much we could say about this article (patronizing, pronouns, utter confusion), but perhaps the most egregious of all is this: Nicole Fabien-Weber seems to think that her granting - or denying - permission for gay boys (or transgender girls) to be crowned prom queens matters. To which we say: Who cares? We are all for gay boys as prom queens, straight jocks as prom kings, straight jocks as prom queens, gay jocks as prom queens, little highschool butches as prom kings, genderqueer folks as prom kings, femmes as prom kings, butches as prom queens - honestly, pretty much any combination you can come up with - as long as the new royalty is happy with their title. And unlike Fabien-Weber, we don’t expect any high school students to be waiting with bated breath for our blog’s opinion on the matter.

Blogic likely agrees with some fraction of the author’s argument, but there’s so much insanity it’s impossible to make sense of it. (For the record, the concept we agree with is that we should cut prom royalty pageants all together).

*interestingly enough, this blog post came from the same people at “thestir.cafemom.com” who also brought us this worthwhile blog post. They sure do have a thing for royalty and backhanded homophobia.

Another reason to ditch that long-distance partner, lose contact with your family

Wed, 01 Jun 2011 11:01:45 -0700

The cell phones and cancer story is back, and Blogic is digging out our walkie talkies. In the frighteningly vague, panic-inducing way that science often presents its findings, the article concludes: Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that “the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.” But just earlier in the article, we read “one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period).”

According to the WHO list, however, risk takers should consider careers in firefighting, dry cleaning, or welding — or, just sit around drinking coffee and talking on your cell phone.

4 signs you SHOULDN'T practice therapy

Fri, 27 May 2011 13:55:00 -0700

Jane Greer, PhD’s recent post “5 signs he DOESN’T love you” doesn’t reveal much about relationships, but it does indicate a few “red flags” in her abilities as a therapist:

1. INCESSANT USE OF CAPS LOCK

2. Dr. Greer’s advice seems to be primarily derived from decades-old song lyrics, like “If he says ‘I only want to be with you,’ pay attention,” “He makes AND breaks promises” and “He always talks about the future, but the future never comes” or (blogic fave) “He says, ‘I want you to have my baby.’”

3. Her past work includes “The Afterlife Connection: A Therapist Reveals How To Communicate With Departed Loved Ones”

4. Her advice sounds like it was culled from a 7th grade birthday-sleepover-party: “if you’re kissing and he’s kissing you back but you find his eyes are open and he’s looking around, you should know that’s a sign to consider.”

*Galtime.com, we know we’ve been harsh (see here). Thanks for keeping the welschmertz at bay, though!

A great way to get rid of all your extra boats

Thu, 26 May 2011 15:49:26 -0700

On a recent excursion in the real world (outside the domain of the interwebs!), blogic discovered this incredibly perplexing advertisement. So perplexing, in fact, that we thought it was worth sharing for several reasons:

The model in the photo bears a striking resemblance to That Girl That You Went To High School With - the one who you’re friends with on facebook and who causes you to say what is your life? to your computer screenas you click through endless photos of her doing increasingly inane activities in what appears to be an unlimited supply of Summer Dresses That Seem Cute But Somehow Look Skanky On Her or something.

Who are these people? Donate a boat or car to Boat Angel by calling 1-800-car-angel or visiting www.boatangel.com. What is their real name? Also, that’s not how you write the letter “T.” We see what they’re trying to do, but instead of witty, it just reads as though it says “Boa Angel.” Can snakes be angels? (Apparently, yes.)

What could possibly explain the decision to put the instruction Call us! into quotation marks? Is it their slogan? Did they think that “Call us!” would make it seem like That Girl was really talking to you from the wall?

This advertisement was found in a public transit station. How many transit riders have spare boats and cars laying around? If they did, then wouldn’t they be boating or driving to work?

What do they do with people’s old boats? Back in our natural habitat, internet research revealed that Boat Angel, while more than willing to take your extra vehicles off your hands and show you videos about child kidnapping or the hazards of hard drug use, is reluctant to give out any details of their operation (except, of course, to your most pressing questions as featured in their FAQ, like “What about the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE what is their view?”).

Creepy goggles and hot coffins: Blogic of the Day, Teen Edition

Thu, 19 May 2011 12:51:00 -0700

Teenage readers, and/or readers with insight into teenbrains: we are dying to know, why would anyone willingly put themselves inside a scary, UV-cancer-wrinkle ray coffin whilst wearing the creepiest goggles ever?

The author of this article has us worried

Thu, 12 May 2011 11:48:00 -0700

We know you know what we’re talking about.

A blogger at “thestir.cafemom.com” offers a revolutionary (heh) perspective on the Royal Wedding in her post, “Kate and William’s Kiss Has Me Worried.” While we’re sure that Kate and William appreciate the author’s concern, we’re not so sure that articles like this are the best use of the author’s time (Lindsay Ferrier is a busy lady).

Maybe Dr. Lillian Glass can help Lindsay get to the bottom of this mystery.

He said/She said: "What a moronic article"

Tue, 10 May 2011 10:20:00 -0700

While the interwebs and cell phones have prevented many a communication disaster, technology brings its challenges. Thank goodness that GalTime.com (yup, actual name) has brought us “He Said/She said: Decoding the text message” to help navigate the rocky waters of SMS:

Text: I wish you were here

GIRL INTERPRETATION: “He really likes me! Awww and he misses me!! So cute!”
BLOGIC INTERPRETATION: We don’t have high hopes for this relationship. For one thing, Unidentified Text Messenger is so cool that he only speaks in Pink Floyd album titles, while Girl has rewatched Sally Field’s Oscar win too many times.

Text: Are you going out tonight/ What are you doing later?

GIRL INTERPRETATION: “He wants to hang out with me! He can’t stop thinking about me!”
BLOGIC INTERPRETATION: At last, someone is telling the truth about how girls only think in exclamation points! Or, on special occasions, hybrid question marks/exclamation points?!
BONUS: “Ensley,” commentator, offers this helpful text interpretation: “Maybe I can get this one in the bag before I have to buy her too many drinks.”

Text: Can we reschedule for another night? I am not feeling well.

GIRL INTERPRETATION: Poor little boo boo! He needs me to bring him chicken soup and some lotion-infused Kleenex!
BLOGIC INTERPRETATION: Girl’s following thought: “Too bad I can’t bring him any of those things. I’m too young to drive.”

Text: I’ll text you later.

GIRL INTERPRETATION: He must be really busy right now. He has such a stressful job! Why can’t his boss give him a break?!
BLOGIC INTERPRETATION: What? No texting at work?!? This Girl seems fundamentally confused about the real-world demands of a job - but that’s probably because her full time job is providing in-depth relationship analysis in 140 character increments.

Blogic is all about making communication easier (if, at the very least, to avoid these situations), but Galtime’s “advice” is does more to perpetuate absurd gender stereotypes than provide any real technological insights. Besides, trying (and failing) to provide insight into relationships via canned stereotypes is so 90s.

Big Potato funds study; finds potatoes are delicious, nutritious

Fri, 06 May 2011 15:09:00 -0700

Blogically Speaking is proud to bring you a guest post from our resident nutrition expert, PG. We are excited to highlight a new voice (although she’s been quoted in some of our earlier inquiry into Big Potato’s tactics).

“The time has come to stand up for potatoes.”

So reads the rallying cry issued by the potato industry last week. This amped-up effort to defend “America’ s favorite vegetable” comes on the heels of the USDA’s proposal to limit school children to one cup of starchy vegetables a week.

The potato industry has been waving around research to back up its argument. The ultimate conclusion of the study most frequently cited? “Potatoes belong within the diet.” While these results seem to provide a legitimate, scientific argument in Big Potato’s favor, a closer look reveals that this study was funded by none other than the United States Potato Board itself.

It should surprise no one that a study about potatoes, by potatoes - and released at a time when potatoes are being scrutinized in cafeterias across the country - would end up ruling in favor of spuds. In fact, one research study looked at this very phenomenon of nutrition-related scientific studies funded by the food industry and came to this same unsurprising (but nonetheless unsettling) conclusion: “Industry funding of nutrition-related scientific articles may bias conclusions in favor of sponsors’ products, with potentially significant implications for public health.”

Potatoes are, to be fair, a perfectly satisfying and nutritious food in their own right. But no matter how nutritious a vegetable in its unadulterated state might be, those benefits are all but negated when it’s sliced into slivers, plunged into a piping hot vat of oil, sprinkled with salt, and emerges as greasy, fatty, calorically dense sticks. (Which is how potatoes are most frequently consumed. Particularly among children.) In fact, while the potato industry is largely taking credit for the increase in kids’ consumption of vegetables, they fail to mention that French Fries account for about one-quarter of children’s vegetable intake. The potato industry’s romanticized campaign, highlighting the many health benefits of this vegetable, doesn’t quite reflect reality.

As you come across statements singing the praises of this “gateway vegetable,” be sure to take them with a grain of salt. The food industry has been, and always will be, motivated by increasing profits, not advancing health. Don’t let the marketing campaigns convince you otherwise.

PG lives in San Francisco and enjoys all things food related - particularly eating. She can frequently be found watching bad reality television, having 90s music sing-a-longs, and avoiding eye contact with people on BART.

Finally! Someone gets us

Thu, 05 May 2011 16:53:00 -0700

“Their lives are nothing like mine - I’m your standard-issue late-20-something childless overeducated atheist feminist - yet I’m completely obsessed with their blogs. On an average day, I’ll skim through a half-dozen Mormon blogs, looking at Polaroids of dogs in raincoats or kids in bow ties, reading gratitude lists, admiring sewing projects.” Emily Matchar’s Salon article, “Why I can’t stop reading Mormon housewife blogs,” sheds light on a surprisingly universal way of wasting time on the internet.

We'll take you dowd town

Wed, 04 May 2011 12:56:00 -0700

Dowd and Out

He can’t handle the truth.

A young computer programmer on his way to a pheasant-hunting trip last November offered a cri de coeur about government groping: Just substitute “Leave the copter, take the corpse” for “Leave the gun, take the cannoli.” Was this, I wondered, the same guy who sometimes showed up in the ’70s with mismatched shoes? Talk about your misty watercolor memories. What’s too painful to remember, we simply choose to forget.

Once upon a time, Cinderella fell out of favor. Nevertheless, Rand is blazing back as an icon of the Tea Party, which overlooks her atheism, amorality in romance and vigorous support for abortion. Our heroine, starting with a family disadvantage, faces hypocrisies, cruelties and obstacles on a perilous journey to a thrilling new world, and uses her wits and integrity to triumph. A new documentary about Cunningham offers a tonic of simplicity and a paean to women after Sheen’s excesses and contempt for women. Jerry Brown doesn’t know who Charlie Sheen is.

We’re bargaining with the shadow of a shadow. Once funeral homes began live-streaming funerals, it was probably inevitable. The antisocial nerd, surrounded by his army of slaving minions, has been holed up making something so revolutionary and magical that it turns him into a force that could conquer the world.

The doomed caribou gazed calmly across the Alaska tundra at Caribou Barbie. Hunting seems more sporting with birds — at least they have a better chance to get away. Unless the hunter is Dick Cheney, who would shoot pheasants that were pen-raised and released from a net to make slaughtering them easier. Hey, dude, you’re a politician. Act like one.

Sound familiar? That’s because all of the above is pieced together from lines out of NYTimes columnist Maureen Dowd’s columns.

*Photo credit: Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

While many (most?) rom coms are either poorly executed with...

Mon, 02 May 2011 16:25:55 -0700

While many (most?) rom coms are either poorly executed with awful plots or just generally painful to watch (this being the driving force behind our segment, Boy + Girl = Movie?) Obvious Child and reminds us of the genre’s potential. Obvious Child, an indie piece, breaks from the mainstream with an excellent cast (notably, Jenny Slate of SNL’s perfect “Car horns and more” and briefly, that guy from that Grampire video on college humor that lebvs likes) and smart, genuine writing. Its summary: “an unplanned pregnancy, an abortion, and a great first date in an unlikely location” rings surprisingly true. Somehow, these 20 minutes on the internet bring together believable characters, chemistry, and real-life choices in a way that Hollywood rarely does. Besides that, it made us laugh. A lot.

Obvious Child includes many of the rom com’s trademark elements: an accidental run-in between love interests, a montage, a trusty best friend. But the film stands out for its refusal to manufacture drama out of reality, and for embracing the every-day conversations and obstacles that make up life. We could say plently about what this piece does for the conversation on abortion in the US, but we think that the films’ creators can explain this much better than we can:

Anna Bean, Karen Maine and Gillian Robespierre, the script’s authors (with Robespierre as the director) offer this statement:
After years of watching many films that featured unplanned pregnancies ending in childbirth (Juno, Knocked Up, Waitress, etc.), we became disenchanted with the the way young women’s experiences with pregnancy were being represented in today’s mainstream media. While we enjoyed these films, we were also greatly unnerved by the ways in which filmmakers (and our culture more generally) have elided the issue of abortion, making it a silent enemy, a choice not to be made. We’ve been waiting to see a film in which a woman makes the other choice, and there’s still a happy ending. With “Obvious Child” we wanted to tell a story of a strong, funny woman who easily makes the decision to have an abortion without feeling guilty or traumatized.

We realize that we are telling just one woman’s story- a story that exists within a privileged environment with regard to class and geography. We weren’t trying to cover everyone’s abortion experience in this film; instead, we hoped to start a conversation in which others could also share their own experiences. At public screenings and on the Internet, we have been witness to lively discussions about abortion and the media, and we hope that such dialogue continues. We believe it is so important that realistic, poignant movies with women at the helm find a place in mainstream cinema and continue to be accessible to wide audiences.

Boy + Girl = Movie? "Something Borrowed," Part 1

Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:06:00 -0700

Rom-com enthusiasts and lady-audiences, demand more from your movie-going experiences! Welcome to Boy + Girl = Movie?, Blogic’s segment in which we watch previews for upcoming rom-coms and, with bizarre specificity, attempt to predict their plots. After completing our prediction, we’ll subject ourselves to real rom-com viewing in the theater in order to confirm - or correct - our predictions. Ultimately, our task is to demonstrate the mediocrity of most mainstream movies geared towards women.

Blogic predicts the rom-com plot: Something Borrowed

Quiet lawyer Ginnifer Goodwin has always been upstaged by best friend Kate Hudson, even back when they were in grade school and hung out with Jim from the office (who was also in grade school at the time, not a pedophile). Kate is life-of-the-party (in fact, she resembles a modern-day Penny Lane) while bff Ginnifer (yes, that’s how she spells it) walks around with her nose in a book (sidenote: Ginnifer should consider cutting her hair short again if she really wants to get any attention). The movie opens with a flashback, as any good rom-com should (see No Strings Attached or Just Go With It). As a law student in NYC, Ginnie fell hard for Whatshisname - who might have liked her back, but alas the two shy youths never speak up, and unfortunately, Gwinnie introduced bff Kate to Whatshisname and Kate worked her blonde magicks. Now, six years later, they’re engaged to be married, while weepy Ginnie is alone on her 30th birthday. The horror!

Cut to: “Another round of drinks!” followed by another, and another. This pre-wedding celebration (30th birthday party?) is a quite hoot, until Kate has to leave (lost purse? too much drinking?) leaving Mousy Ginnie and handsome Whatshisname all alone. No big deal - they’re just friends! Or are they?

But, as happens frequently in rom-coms, the friends accidentally have sex and thus, the real drama begins. Ginnie and Whatshisface should probably stop sleeping together, but, they can’t, and instead use her unassuming mousiness and Kate’s self-centered drama whirlwind to their advantage. Soon, one night of passionate regret evolves into a secret relationship of illicit love. The problem? Kate and Whatshisname are getting married, and the wedding is fast approaching.

The plot thickens. Will Ginnie tell Kate, profess her love for Whatshisname, and throw years of friendship to down the drain? (To be fair, it’s not the honesty, but the sleeping with her bestie’s fiance that technically caused the upset, but - potato, pa-ta-toh). Will Whatshisname call off the wedding? What if Whatshisname is not the man we thought he was, and Ginnie’s actually in love with Jim Halpert, who loves her back, despite the trailer’s requisite hollywood gaydar hints (Smarmy side comments, Oprah reference)? Blogic says: Yes, yes, and yes. We spy additional plot twists: while Gwinnie and Whatshisname ultimately will not end up together, neither will Whatshisname and Kate, potentially due to some similar sneaking around on Kate’s part.

Bonus Predictions:

Frequency with which Ginnie is shown to be working as a busy lawyer: 1
Sex Scenes: 3
Flashbacks: 2
Weddings: at least 1
Crowd of guests left baffled at a last-minute wedding cancellation: 1
Kate Hudson’s career: PR (or publishing?)
offensive jokes: 0
Trips to the Hamptons: 1
Characters running - nay, chasing - after love: 3
Scenes in which Kate Hudson is embarrassingly intoxicated: 3

Note: Apparently, this is a book?

"Vibrators Carry the Conversation:" ORLY? Blogic reacts

Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:40:00 -0700

A New York Times piece last week generated a lot of buzz (heh) with its analysis of the increasingly mainstream availability of vibrators. Despite being firm supporters of sex positivity and access to sex education, condoms, contraception, toys etc. etc., we found this article lacking. Hints of a feminist analysis appear, but never quite come to fruition; instead, readers are bombarded with product placement. Below, blogic reacts:

Tag line: As women take ownership of their sexuality, device makers begin to make more money: Basically, “feminism’s changing the world: because women want to buy more/other things?” Please - we’ve heard that before.
Opening line: “TOOTHPASTE? Check. Tampons? Check. Vibrator? Check!” VOMIT, check.
“For years, vibrators were bought quietly in sex shops, and later online, arriving in discreet unmarked packages. They were rarely discussed, other than perhaps during a late-night girl-talk session fueled by many glasses of pinot grigio.” Ugh, untrue. This author has stupid friends.
“…it wasn’t until an episode of HBO’s “Sex and the City” —called “The Turtle and the Hare,” featuring an actual device called the Rabbit Pearl — that the vibrator truly emerged from the nightstand drawer.” Readers, remember that episode? The one that gets mentioned in every article on “female sexual liberation” because it was just that groundbreaking? Let’s refresh your memory, dear readers: Big tells Carrie he’ll never marry again, Charlotte gets a vibrator and then doesn’t want do anything else ever again, and Miranda and Samantha do other things (internet research has revealed that Samantha has a “harsh dumping” - really, HBO summary guide? Really?). The point here: can we all please agree to stop attributing the feminist movement to that show?
Dr Laura Berman, the sex therapist from “Sexual Healing,” the short-lived but well-loved HBO show, is quoted. We have to ask, what are you doing in this article? You deserve better.
“Jeremy, 31, a content strategist in the entertainment business who lives in New York and wanted his last name omitted for privacy, said…” Jeremy and his girlfriend Kate, hoping for anonymity, still gave their first names and job titles? Anyone with access to the internet should be able to crack that code. Poor planning, team.
We are getting the distinct impression that the author seems to think that only straight ladies use vibrators. Newsflash: Untrue!
“And “Hysteria,” a romantic comedy in post-production that will star Maggie Gyllenhaal and Hugh Dancy, will recount the same point in Victorian history. The plot revolves around Mr. Dancy’s character, a young earnest doctor who takes a job massaging women’s pelvises into “paroxysms.” But when the doctor develops carpal tunnel syndrome, his best friend (Rupert Everett), who is obsessed with electricity, invents a device that has impressively efficient curative powers.” Did somebody say rom com? Boy + Girl = Movie, anyone?

We’re all for both the press and mainstream public having frank, open conversations about sexuality - but let’s do it genuinely, and leave product placement out of it.

You know it's bad when...

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:25:42 -0700

…you start agreeing with crazy caps-locked youtube commenters:

Uh oh, I think our weltschmerz is acting up again.

Marathon Monday

Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:42:00 -0700

Today, thousands of people ran Boston’s legendary Boston Marathon. One of them, Geoffrey Mutai of Kenya, ran the 26 miles in the fastest time ever (2:03:02). In celebration of everyone who participated, Blogic declares this Marathon Monday. While we might not be up for running 26.2 miles today (or any day, for that matter), here are some other things we love times 26.2.

lebvs would eat 26.2 cadbury creme eggs:

ev would eat 26.2 cups of popcorn with Crystal hot sauce:

lebvs and ev would both read this Q&A by the hairpin on tampons in the office at least 26.2 times (and actually, probably already have). lebvs calls it “the best piece of internet [she’s] read in weeks.”

Powerful men, scary women

Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:36:00 -0700

John Denny has taken a “tongue-in-cheek look at the women who scare him the most - in a good way.” Expecting to find the Blair Witch and that girl from The Ring, we instead found a list of women who are actually just really good at their jobs: Helen Hanna Casey is one of the most successful women business leaders in Pennsylvania…. Helen also makes sure the company gives back to the community – to the tune of $5.5 million to the Children’s Hospital Free Care Fund. Or Ann McGuinn, a passionate, tireless leader of many causes, of whom Denny cleverly says: “There is only one person more scared of Ann McGuinn than me and that’s her husband Marty McGuinn.”

Given the tone of the piece, we must believe that Denny is joking - but this is a stale joke. Instead of adding smart commentary, or mocking other journalists who perpetuate this kind of thinking, Denny rests on sexism’s laurels and his piece comes off as pure chauvinism (women! powerful! ballbusters! scary! good one!). We’re certainly not the first ones to point this out, but calling strong women scary is the oldest trick in the book to diminish their power. This “scare” tactic is clearly rooted in gender stereotypes and perpetuates norms about who should be in control. Men who attain similarly lofty goals are not “scary,” they’re skilled leaders - even if their companies are big and scary. After all, who’s afraid of Bill Gates?

While if some might find it commendable that Denny bothered to make a list of Pennsylvanian women leaders in the first place, we would prefer that he had left the job to someone capable of honoring these women without diminishing their accomplishments, even if for a few quick laughs. Sexist articles like this one do more to perpetuate gender power imbalances than to right them.

Blogic decided to create our own list of scary men. These are the type of people who deserve to be associated with the adjective “scary:”

David Miscavige: Current leader of the Church of Scientology and affiliated organizations. His work included securing the church a tax exemption status, and being the “driving force behind … Scientology for the past two decades.” His career has been riddled with multiple reports of emotional and physical abuse of his staff, forced labor and child labor, and embezzling. We’re scared of David Miscavige because he appears to be a control freak, has a lot of money at his disposal, and because he’s a personal friend of Tom Cruise (he even was Best Man in Cruise’s wedding to Katie Holmes).

Jared Lee Loughner: Few words are needed to demonstrate that the man charged with the brutal, senseless attack in Tuscon this past January is terrifying. We’re afraid of this man because he has no regard for innocent life.

Mel Gibson: Remember him? With Charlie Sheen taking up so much celebcrazy, it’s all too easy to forget the man who, perhaps most (in)famously, left racist, sexist and violent messages on ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva’s machine (click here to see the 20 worst things Mel said in that call, as presented by kittens). He’s also been known to make homophobic and antisemitic statements, and year later, still refuses to apologize for them. Also, that beard. Basically, we’re afraid of Mel because he hates almost everyone who isn’t like him, he’s famous and people apparently still like him, and he looks like a Robot Devil.

Paul Ryan: Rep. Ryan is a Republican in the House of Representatives who, unfortunately for the American public, serves on the House Budget Committee and the Committee on Ways and Means. Ryan’s fiscal “strategy” is based on taking the food out of the mouths of the average American family and stuffing it into the pockets of the wealthiest 2% of individuals and corporations. Ryan is a fierce proponent of trickle-down economics, and consistently pushes for both lower tax rates for the wealthy and less health care for the working poor. We are afraid of Paul Ryan because he wields enormous power in this country and uses that power to make life even more difficult for individuals, families, and communities most at risk and because he is the favorite potential presidential candidate among tea-party members.

That Creepy Guy lebvs Recently Saw on The Street: “Join the church of the places and why would you not my children only if you can’t see the truth of truths to stay true! Or else you will become [mumble mumble mumble].” Also, he was wearing a tattered choir boy outfit. It was dark out, and he came out of nowhere.

Babe bracket: It's like March Madness, only sexist!

Mon, 04 Apr 2011 14:52:17 -0700

In honor of March Madness, Men’s Health Magazine has developed a bracket of its own: The Babe Bracket 2011. According to the website, “It’s like March Madness, only hotter!” 64 female athletes faced one another in successive rounds, and voters selected the winners of each round in a method similar to that of kittenwar.com.

The contest focuses on female athletes, which seems like something that blogic would support - except, the athletes are judged not on their athletic abilities but on their levels of relative hotness. In fact, the two finalists’ photos do not even depict them doing their sports, (unless, that is, Julia Mancuso typically races down the mountain without pants). The finalists’ athletic abilities do not seem to correlate with their success in the Babe Bracket. Golfer Anna Rawson has “LPGA Tour Member” listed as her “accomplishment.” Now, we’re not golf experts, but we’re pretty sure that “member” is not synonymous with “winner” when it comes to the LPGA tour.

But perhaps we should give Men’s Health credit for trying to include women in the NCAA Tournament. I mean, it’s not like they have a tournament of their own, or anything.

*Kittenwar.com, unlike “babe bracket,” is in fact a quality website and not sexist at all.

Scientific world pranked: How Science Daily does April Fool's

Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:02:29 -0700

Science Daily has let loose a slew of fake headlines in the past 24 hours in celebration of April Fools Day. Below are Blogic’s faves:

Molar Power: Milk Teeth Wanted for Stem Cell Palace Art Project: Children across Britain are being asked to donate their milk teeth to create “Palaces” — a spectacular glittering sculpture made from crystal resin and decorated with retired pearly whites. Tooth fairy forced to turn to black market.* [Also, do they mean baby teeth? What is a “milk tooth?” British readership, fill us in.]
Long Lost Cousin of T. Rex Identified by Scientists: Scenes from their emotional reunion to air on Dateline NBC this Friday.*
Common Yellow Lab Dye Profoundly Extends Lifespan in Healthy Nematodes: Nematodes, like crackpot alchemists, still scrambling for key to eternal life.*
Advance Toward Making Biodegradable Plastics from Waste Chicken Feathers: It’s a good thing, because the world had been wondering how to deal with all of those non-biodegradable chicken feathers. Reuse recycle campaigns coming to a coop near you.*

*Sentences added by blogic.

April Fool’s! Those headlines are all from real pieces covered in Science Daily. You see what we did there? We’re such tricksters. PS. Even though we’ve been known to poke fun at you, we love you Science Daily, never change.

*photo of Zhuchengtyrannus magnus courtesy Science Daily