Yeah, I'm a comic book nerd. I grew up on them. Any guy who says they didn't is either a liar or a moron. For little boys, comic books are something that gives them an escape. Only dirty hippie mothers made their kids read "real books" all the time.
As a result of comic book reading I discovered a few things. One was that comic book women are fake. The second was that DC and Marvel were two different things. It's not just a comic when speaking of DC vs. Marvel. We're talking "human vs. hero". I love both styles, but the recent movie benge has turned me off. The recent explosion of Marvel movies is drenched in the smell of money. I think the DC characters make a much better movie.
Marvel made it's name in making characters human. They faced all the problems life could hand them. Spiderman = A nerd who becomes a loser hero. Iron Man = Alcoholic who becomes a loser hero. However, DC characters entered the fantastic. Superman = Man from another world fights intergalactic foes. Batman = Rich boy who learned Kung Fu and beats up insane villans. Eventually the DC characters lead to darker roles. It's weird because you think the lighthearted "we know your pain" roles of Marvel would be better. However, I think the darker DC roles fit closer to home. Batman makes us glad we don't live in his world. Superman makes us think, "What if?" While a kid in teen angst might envision himself as Spiderman, everyone wants to be Superman.
PS. I hope there's a true Avengers movie in the works... and a Justice League movie.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Me and her... or Is there any wonder I'm not married.
This past weekend I went on a date. Granted it was at a free concert downtown, but it was supposed to be a date. We sat far enough back that the band playing wouldn't overcome our ability to cary on a conversation. However, a conversation never occured. It was me trying to fit in a word while she chatted on her cell phone. Eventually I just rocked out to Alter Bridge and I don't intend on calling said female ever again.
I only wonder when women became so stuck on themselves that cellphone conversations were exceptable on a date. It's not the first time this has happened. I'm not a bad date either, so that's not the excuse. I blame it on women being encouraged to see men as an accesory, rather than a blessing. It's like reverse sexism. Men are treated as objects and women are praised for acting so. Look at popular media and prove me wrong.
I've been with women who've treated me from a key to another guy, a bookmark, an ATM, and several other analogies. It's demoralizing. People wonder why I'm afraid to ask a lady out. Basically, I have been trained to know what is going to happen. It's one thing to expect to not get a second date. It's another when you are bombarded with examples of how men are horrible and deserved to be used, getting used, and being ignored.
If women want a key to understanding guys, it's not that complicated:
1. We want to be listened to, and feel we are a part the conversation.
2. We like to have our egos stroked. Compliment us every chance you get.
3. Don't ignore us, because every guy likes to know you're thinking about us.
4. Just because we don't notice everything or drop money on everything doesn't make us less romantic.
5. We are going to notice the hot woman in the short skirt. Get over it.
6. You look hot. We might not say it. We wouldn't go out with you if we didn't think so.
7. We don't care about what happened in highschool.
8. There's three topics guys will pay attention to. One is sports. Two is music. The third only relates to your lesbian experience in college.
9. We will kill your ex-boyfriend.
10. We will kill the guy making eyes at you.
Number 11 should be that you can call us. The whole asking a girl out was passe once you quit thinking you were inferior.
See? Not so hard. Guys are primitive. We are simple and don't overthink things. That's what women like. If we were girly and emotional, women would hate men like they hate other women. Don't confront me on that. I work with nothing but women. I know the rules. I've heard the stories. Don't make me qoute when my co-workers' cycles are. That's disturbing enough.
I only wonder when women became so stuck on themselves that cellphone conversations were exceptable on a date. It's not the first time this has happened. I'm not a bad date either, so that's not the excuse. I blame it on women being encouraged to see men as an accesory, rather than a blessing. It's like reverse sexism. Men are treated as objects and women are praised for acting so. Look at popular media and prove me wrong.
I've been with women who've treated me from a key to another guy, a bookmark, an ATM, and several other analogies. It's demoralizing. People wonder why I'm afraid to ask a lady out. Basically, I have been trained to know what is going to happen. It's one thing to expect to not get a second date. It's another when you are bombarded with examples of how men are horrible and deserved to be used, getting used, and being ignored.
If women want a key to understanding guys, it's not that complicated:
1. We want to be listened to, and feel we are a part the conversation.
2. We like to have our egos stroked. Compliment us every chance you get.
3. Don't ignore us, because every guy likes to know you're thinking about us.
4. Just because we don't notice everything or drop money on everything doesn't make us less romantic.
5. We are going to notice the hot woman in the short skirt. Get over it.
6. You look hot. We might not say it. We wouldn't go out with you if we didn't think so.
7. We don't care about what happened in highschool.
8. There's three topics guys will pay attention to. One is sports. Two is music. The third only relates to your lesbian experience in college.
9. We will kill your ex-boyfriend.
10. We will kill the guy making eyes at you.
Number 11 should be that you can call us. The whole asking a girl out was passe once you quit thinking you were inferior.
See? Not so hard. Guys are primitive. We are simple and don't overthink things. That's what women like. If we were girly and emotional, women would hate men like they hate other women. Don't confront me on that. I work with nothing but women. I know the rules. I've heard the stories. Don't make me qoute when my co-workers' cycles are. That's disturbing enough.
The Sky Is Falling... or The environmentalists better back off before I bust a CFC cap in them.
I got a call today by my mom about a hurricane that is floating in the Atlantic. It's name is Bertha. No doubt the "weather geeks" want a chance to add the moniker "Big Bertha". Somehow the appearance of this hurricane... during hurricane season... has prompted threats about global warming.
Let me state a few obvious truths:
1. It is July and it is supposed to be in the 90's. I live in the South.
2. It is hurricane season, which implies that hurricanes are probable
3. The media wants another Katrina (which is still a pitiful subject) so bad they follow every hurricane and act as if it were the bringer of the end of the world.
Now for my Katrina comment. Katrina did more direct damage to outlying areas of New Orleans than the actual city itself. The problem with New Orleans was it was a death trap and had been for centuries. No sensible person would have stayed there when a hurricane was comming. The kicker is everyone expected the government to fix everything. That's what charity is for. The government's only duty is to make sure the country runs. It's not a difficult concept. The engineering, management, inhabitants, and mayor of New Orleans were all morons. I'm sorry if that pisses off a few people but it's the truth. I volunteered to help with reconstruction of New Orleans because it was a horrible fate for any community. But no one should expect absolute repayment for a loss.
A reasonable example would be this:
You live in an area that is labled a fire hazard. No fire has occured in 100 years, but everyone says it is due. All of a sudden a fire ignites due to lightening and it spreads to the point your entire town is burned down. People refused to leave the town and died in the fire... even though it was seen from miles away. During the fire homes were looted and police were killed. The scene was total chaos. The local government sends support to help quell the fires but little can be done. After the fire has died out the federal agencies arrive to provide support. Yet social activists say the government acted too late and everyone effected is owed money and support. Not only that, but the activists say the area mainly consisted of minorities and there was a vast conspiracy to not act.
This sounds like a sham if there ever was one. No government wishes it's own citizens to suffer. The key is to the reading of the Constitution. This argument has existed since the birth of the nation. Is the security of the United States citizens dependent on the state government or the federal? It's not that deep of a concept, considering the fact we've mastered flight into space. Yet people have manipulated this idea for more than a century to make political gains.
Now the new scheme is global warming. While I don't deny the world is warming (nor do I agree with the theory), I don't think it is a viable political device. I know it's the only thing Al Gore can make money on these days. However, Al Gore has proven what a dunce he can be. My belief in global warming is like so many environmentalists' beliefs in God. It's a sad fact, but very true. Be angry if you want, but prove me wrong.
Let me state a few obvious truths:
1. It is July and it is supposed to be in the 90's. I live in the South.
2. It is hurricane season, which implies that hurricanes are probable
3. The media wants another Katrina (which is still a pitiful subject) so bad they follow every hurricane and act as if it were the bringer of the end of the world.
Now for my Katrina comment. Katrina did more direct damage to outlying areas of New Orleans than the actual city itself. The problem with New Orleans was it was a death trap and had been for centuries. No sensible person would have stayed there when a hurricane was comming. The kicker is everyone expected the government to fix everything. That's what charity is for. The government's only duty is to make sure the country runs. It's not a difficult concept. The engineering, management, inhabitants, and mayor of New Orleans were all morons. I'm sorry if that pisses off a few people but it's the truth. I volunteered to help with reconstruction of New Orleans because it was a horrible fate for any community. But no one should expect absolute repayment for a loss.
A reasonable example would be this:
You live in an area that is labled a fire hazard. No fire has occured in 100 years, but everyone says it is due. All of a sudden a fire ignites due to lightening and it spreads to the point your entire town is burned down. People refused to leave the town and died in the fire... even though it was seen from miles away. During the fire homes were looted and police were killed. The scene was total chaos. The local government sends support to help quell the fires but little can be done. After the fire has died out the federal agencies arrive to provide support. Yet social activists say the government acted too late and everyone effected is owed money and support. Not only that, but the activists say the area mainly consisted of minorities and there was a vast conspiracy to not act.
This sounds like a sham if there ever was one. No government wishes it's own citizens to suffer. The key is to the reading of the Constitution. This argument has existed since the birth of the nation. Is the security of the United States citizens dependent on the state government or the federal? It's not that deep of a concept, considering the fact we've mastered flight into space. Yet people have manipulated this idea for more than a century to make political gains.
Now the new scheme is global warming. While I don't deny the world is warming (nor do I agree with the theory), I don't think it is a viable political device. I know it's the only thing Al Gore can make money on these days. However, Al Gore has proven what a dunce he can be. My belief in global warming is like so many environmentalists' beliefs in God. It's a sad fact, but very true. Be angry if you want, but prove me wrong.
Homeruns are the biz... or Its all in the heart.
I watched the homerun contest on ESPN. I have several thoughts that you won't read on the typical news page. The first relates to how horrible Chris Berman is as an annoucer for baseball. Every time he is in charge of the game the coversation somehow gets lost way beyond what's happening on the field. The sad part is the conversation never returns to what's going on on the field. I know Chris "Boomer" Berman is loved by the whole sports media type, but he sucks. He's horrible in baseball, terrible in football, and if I ever watched pro basketball and he announced it I'm sure he'd be bad at that.
I believe too much emphasis is placed on homeruns in Major League Baseball. It is my belief that baseball is about the way the game is played, and not the number of balls knocked out of the park. Beyond seeing Erin Andrews a few extra times in a week, the Home Run competition means little else.
My third thought is about how the "nation has just learned" about Josh Hamilton's struggles. I have known about his problems since they first happened. Granted, I also know nearly everyone involved in his recovery. However, it's almost as if ESPN wants to cash in on his problems. I suffer from at least one of the same problems as Josh. Everyone suffers from some problem that Josh has had. I know it's nothing you want pointed out as you try to remake a name for yourself. I also know the people behind him won't back out on him. Sometimes I wish I had the same support. But Josh Hamilton is not just there to cram home runs down the media's throat. How many times can you count that he witnessed to the crowd at Yankee's stadium? And how many cheers did he get? It's powerul stuff that Josh deals. As someone who knows a little of his trials, and can't fathom the level he is on, I definitely respect him. I also despise ESPN for playing it up for the wrong reasons.
I believe too much emphasis is placed on homeruns in Major League Baseball. It is my belief that baseball is about the way the game is played, and not the number of balls knocked out of the park. Beyond seeing Erin Andrews a few extra times in a week, the Home Run competition means little else.
My third thought is about how the "nation has just learned" about Josh Hamilton's struggles. I have known about his problems since they first happened. Granted, I also know nearly everyone involved in his recovery. However, it's almost as if ESPN wants to cash in on his problems. I suffer from at least one of the same problems as Josh. Everyone suffers from some problem that Josh has had. I know it's nothing you want pointed out as you try to remake a name for yourself. I also know the people behind him won't back out on him. Sometimes I wish I had the same support. But Josh Hamilton is not just there to cram home runs down the media's throat. How many times can you count that he witnessed to the crowd at Yankee's stadium? And how many cheers did he get? It's powerul stuff that Josh deals. As someone who knows a little of his trials, and can't fathom the level he is on, I definitely respect him. I also despise ESPN for playing it up for the wrong reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)