what's your #?

"what's your number?" is a movie that "...follows Ally (Anna Faris) who after reading a magazine article states 'In America 97% of women who have had 20 or more lovers can’t find a husband.' This inevitably leads the character (who of course is at number 19) to believe she’s going to be forever alone. Thus beginning a wild search for the best 'ex' of her life." [source]

20 does sound like kind of a lot. but is it really? let's say you started having sex at 18yo and you're now 30yo. that means you had over 10 years to sleep with 20 people, that's less than 2 people a year. that's not much at all! i think when you put it into those terms, average in a year, it sounds like waaaay less. i think a total number can definitely be misleading, so we should maybe start thinking about averages. ...to a point.

i think your average number should get smaller as you get older. if you've been having sex for 70 years and your number is 70, that's still pretty gross; i don't care that it averages out to only one person a year! i think anyone's cap should be under 50, which i admit is a completely arbitrary number. i'd probably be able to give a better "defined" number if i knew when people stopped having sex. do most 85yo still have sex? i have no idea! (and there seems to be no consensus online, tho you might be interested to learn that the average age of americans to start having sex is 17)

btw, i don't think it matters if you're male or female. i'm going to judge you equally if you've slept with 40 people (tho why you'd even bother counting past, like, single digits is beyond me [single digits only because they're much easier to remember])

giving tree

shel silverstein narrates animated "the giving tree". video is from 1973 so it's not the best quality. worth watching nevertheless!!

racsim as vogue

caucasian model gets her eyes pulled back in photo shoot to look asian. what's really weird, is that it was for an issue of vogue nippon (japanese vogue). ...

there's a poll at the end of the article on whether it's "racist and inappropriate" or "simply playful and fun." the votes are 60% for for fun. ...that's fucking BULLSHIT.

asians are stereotyped for many things: bad drivers, good at math, buck teeth, slitty eyes. but by far we are most made fun of for our "chinky" eyes. someone "playing asian" by pulling back their eyes is incredibly racist!

can you imagine a magazine putting black face paint on a white model (and tho it has happened, most people were outraged!)? or giving a narrow nosed model a prosthetic hooked nose and saying she's jewish? that wouldn't be allowed because it's recognized as clearly racist!!

this reminds me of the rosie o'donnell racist comments a number of years ago. not only was she clearly racist, but she had the audacity to refuse to apologize (she did eventually, but really only because she was forced to. and honestly, it wasn't a sincere apology.). in fact, her rep said, on record, that "She’s a comedian in addition to being a talk show co-host. I certainly hope that one day they will be able to grasp her humor." oh, i get it. it's funny when people make fun of asians and we jut don't get it because we don't have a sense of humor. well, black people are funny right? yet, i don't see them laughing about how they're discriminated against. also how people no longer make fun of "money grubbing jews", or the "drunk irish", "crime prone blacks", "gambling addicted native americans", "dirty poles", "america hating middle easterners", or whatever the fuck.

no seriously, think for a damn second if someone were making fun of your ethnicity and the violent history that came with hundreds of years of ignorance and discrimination, it's not "simply playful and fun" anymore now is it?

(btw, i've been experimenting with punctuation [specifically with quotation marks]. i've never been fully comfortable with the american way of using quotation marks and recently found out that the british punctuate in a way i find to make more sense.)

single again?

i've asked rip this same question a couple times over the past 10 years and he always has the same answer: no, he doesn't have any regrets about not having dated more. i asked him again a while ago and he added that "being single just seems like a hassle." which i do agree with. yet...

it's not that i want to gain more sexual experience or anything like that. i think i just miss the excitement of a new relationship. the shy flirting, the ambiguity of 'does he like me?', the excitement of finding out random things in common, the electricity of the "firsts", the shimmer of possibilities...

in a long term relationship, there's very little that's new. you rarely even have new fights (tho rip and i had a BIG new one in july, which i won't get into except to quote henry fielding - the history of tom jones: "my eyes must have been very faithless interpreters of my heart"). even when i "catch" him looking at me, it makes me happy, but i'm not still excited about it hours later.

i think a big part of the problem is with tv (ha!). but seriously. nearly every show has the two lead characters with tons of sexual tension. and, as dorky as it is, i get really excited about castle and beckett and mcnally and swarek. and, of course, tv romances pale in comparison to my real life one. so i get a little sad.

anyway. i'm not saying that i want to be single again. but if rip were to fall into a coma for a few years, well... tho let's hope he doesn't!!!

btw, rip and i are "celebrating" our 11th anniversary today. pretty crazy, eh?

name of the game

ive been watching bachelor pad. i know, i know... anyway, the other night they played the "nearly wed game", which the "newlywed game" except that none of them are married (btw, the video is pretty good, if you've got 14mins to watch it).

one of the questions was "how many dates does your partner need before 'make whoopie'?" answers: 5, 22, 3, 7, 14. (btw, the girl who said 3 then said "i'm kind of a slut". the girl who said 14 said it was only after 32 dates that she slept with her game partner [her ex-fiance]. also, the girl who said 7 has to be discounted because they were playing to a strategy, not just the game.)

i think some of these answers are CRAZY. i mean, 22? why that number specifically?! and the girl who said it was after 32 dates that she slept with her guy is also nuts. 1. you counted? 2. you remembered?!

okay, back to me (ha!). how many dates? i must be super slutty because, well, i'd probably sleep with you on the first date. i think a lot of people don't have sex early on because of the "respect" factor. but it goes both ways, doesn't it? cause, hey, you had sex on the first date too! so if you're going to un-respect me for doing the same thing you are, i don't particularly care cause you're a massive hypocrite and we're not going to be in much contact after this date, in which case, i should feel free to have fun and have sex.

honestly, i think having a guideline number is okay, if it's an easy to keep track of number (single digits). i think a better gauge would be how you feel about each other, where you are in the relationship, or other non-arbitrary markers.

there are too many random rules and games being played in relationships: you can't call before 3 days, man always pays no matter what, you can't say "i love you" first, you can't sex till after 22 dates, what the bloody hell? if you like someone, call them! if you love someone, tell them! if you want to have sex, do it!

part of why relationships are so much fun are because of the excitement of not knowing exactly what's going to happen. if you schedule and regulate stuff that takes a lot of the spontaneity out. and i think, more importantly, the whole thing just seems less genuine. in which case, if it even worth it? not for me anyway.

good business?

went to target this mid-morning to check out the missoni collection. i was only planning to buy bobby pins since i'm low anyway, but i did want to look at their stuff since i've only really seen it online (btw, the target website crashed from all the traffic!). maybe it's my fault because i didn't get there first thing in the morning, but nearly everything was sold out!! the target employees said there was a big line waiting for the store to open and that within the 30 minutes nearly everything was gone. target was smart and set up all the missoni stuff on endcaps or in highly visible places so people wouldn't miss anything. and they really didn't! but even this "late in the day" there were some women with shopping carts full of missoni stuff. seriously, jam packed with nothing other than missoni (they were practically stalking the target employees waiting for them to restock with new items they had just found in the backroom). that might be cool if they really like missoni, but no one buys 10 pairs of the exact same shoe in multiple sizes!

i came home and did a search on ebay and wouldn't you know, there are already thousands of items up! i hate these people! i get that this is a good way to make some money, but it's also pretty fucked up. i wouldn't go as far as to say it's immoral, but it's certainly shady as hell.

i remember that when h&m did their designer collaborations they limited customers to either a few items each, or one of each item in the collection, i can't remember exactly. but i think that's a great idea. of course, dishonest people will go back and wait in line again, or go to another store, or bring their whole family to buy stuff but at least h&m tried to let as many people as they can access the collection. target should seriously consider doing the same thing. if you can't stop opportunistic people, you can at least inconvenience them.

btw, those bobby pins i bought for $7? i found them on ebay for $30.

remembering

source

the older generation talks about certain moments that they know they'll always remember. i don't mean their wedding day or when their first kid gets born. i mean when pearl harbor was attacked or when kennedy was shot. even as a kid i thought "i never want to have one of those moments." yet, ten years ago, something really scary happened and i'll remember that moment forever.

saturn

amazing photo of saturn!!

saturn in front of the sun: cassini spacecraft captures breathtaking view of ringed planet

no more mctoys

last year san fransisco banned mcdonald's from giving out free toys in their happy meals. people say the toys in un-healthy meals gives kids extra incentive to want to eat fast food, which could eventually lead to childhood obesity.

cnn reports that "40% of preschool-aged children ask to go to McDonald's on a weekly basis, and 15% ask on a daily basis. Also, 84% of parents say they've taken their children to eat fast food at least once in the past week."

yeah, i'm pretty sure that isn't because of the toys. do these kids only play with the toy and discard the food? no, they want all of it. cause let's face it, the food tastes pretty damn good.

btw, it's the parents who take their kids, no? because parents decide what to feed their kids. kids can ask for whatever they want, but they don't matter, the parents do. i get that sometimes your kids drive you crazy so you cave in and do what they want, instead of what's good for them. but that's still up to you.

also, "the fast food industry spent $4.2 billion on advertising in 2009." which apparently these kids are falling for since they ask their parents so often to take them. (tho, again, parents don't have to do whatever their kids ask for) so maybe instead of banning the toys, which i know a lot of adults enjoy too, maybe don't let fast food places advertise during kids shows. just like how companies aren't allowed to advertise alcohol or sexy 1-900#s during kids shows. a few counties actually don't allow companies to advertise at all to kids under a certain age.

the ban isn't for every meal offering though. if restaurants want to continue to give away toys, the meal it comes with will need to "contain fewer than 600 calories [drink included], and less than 35% of total calories will come from fat. The meal must contain half a cup of fruit and three-fourths cup of vegetables, and offer less than 640 milligrams of sodium and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat."

it'll be interesting to see kids ask for the healthy toy-included meals instead of the regular now toy-free happy meals.

happy meal updated. no word about those toys tho.

ashamed

the other day my neighbor asked where i find the organizations that i do drives for. was it through my church?, he asked. so i replied that no, i find the organizations online. i don't go to church; i'm an atheist. he made a face and said that i "shouldn't say things like that." i didn't ask, but i figure "that" is that i'm an atheist.

WTH?

religious people are now offended that i'm an atheist and ask me to not say what my religious affiliation is even though it basically came up in the conversation? well FUCK you! i didn't ask for christmas or "under god" in our pledge of allegiance and i sure as hell don't appreciate it when homeless people i give money to tell me "god bless." that makes me want to snatch my money right back. it also makes me want to yell at every religion pushing person that "goddamn it, atheists do nice stuff too!" but that would make me a bigot, just like you!

keep your fucking religion to yourself, and i'll keep my heathen ways to myself. don't bloody preach at me and then tell me to not talk about how i don't believe in any of that shit you do. btw, i didn't even fucking talk about it! all i said was that i don't go to church since i'm an atheist. that's it. it's like you telling me telling me that you go to synagogue cause you're jewish. i don't ask you to keep that info to yourself because it's nothing to be ashamed of.

you ought to be ashamed of yourself! you shouldn't silence others just cause they disagree with you. let's all just be loud and proud together, okay?