Terry Frank has a doozy of a post that raises all kinds of questions. The most important one being “Terry Frank watches America’s Next Top Model”?!
I have to admit, I’ve been trying to imagine this all morning. Does she watch it on its regular channel or is she forced to watch it on hung-over Saturdays when they have marathons of it on seemingly every cable channel? Does she catch her kids watching it and start to say “I don’t want this trash on in my hou…” only to find by the time she’s got the “ssss” out, she’s sitting on the couch transfixed by its amazing awfulness? Does she turn to her kids, like everyone else in America, and ask “What is wrong with these people?” and then they all share a good laugh as a family?
I mean, shoot, if there’s one thing that folks all across this state, regardless of political persuasion, should be able to agree on it’s that there’s something fucked up about America’s Next Top Model.
But, apparently, America’s Next Top Model is all the fault of the feminists. Because nothing says “feminism” like a bunch of girls trying to win a contest based solely on their looks. Oh, wait! Actually, that doesn’t say feminism at all. That says “same old same old.” So, Terry Frank, don’t be trying to blame feminists for ANTM. That’s solely on you folks who reject the idea of equality. You guys are the ones who place so much value on a woman’s looks. Remember? We’re the hairy, fat, make-up-less man-haters. Why would we care about ANTM for any reason other than amusement?
Anyway, in the middle of her rant, she blames feminism for gay men judging beauty contests. I’m not sure how this happens. I’m assuming that we order gay men to go into beauty pagents and ruin them for everyone else? I’m not sure. The point is that, apparently, some feminists have armies of gay men waiting to do their bidding and I don’t.
How do I get issued an army of gay men who go around ruining things for conservatives on my whim?
Come on, people! There’s a whole downtown full of state legislators I need to unleash some hilarious nonsense onto and I cannot do this without my army of gay men. Someone’s got to walk behind Senator Bunch and make farting noises and then roll his eyes and point at Bunch like he’s got some horrible gas problem.
Or what about Lowe Finney? There’s still hope for him and we can encourage him with some positive reinforcement. Every time he does something Democratic, my troops will cheer. Every time he strays onto the Republican path, he will be met with stern looks and disapproving coughs.
It’d be so great. And I’m being deprived.
How can I possibly have the power to ruin everything for the good people of Tennessee if I can’t even get my army?
Clearly, there’s something wrong here.
And here I expected a rant on how Campfield’s “Women Are Lying Slutty Bitches Who Extort Benign Men Out of They’re [sic] Hard-Earned Money” legislation passed overwhelmingly.
Eh, it doesn’t surprise me that it passed and I suspect it’s a hollow victory. Towards the end it reads:
Now someone who’s a lawyer will know better than me, but doesn’t that seem to suggest that, if you’re on the birth certificate (the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity), the law considers you the kid’s father, whether you’re the biological father or not?
So how applicable is this going to be? How many cases are there where a guy is NOT on a child’s birth certificate, but is paying court-ordered child support, only to discover that he’s not really the father? Probably not very many. If any.
I’m not sure what this bill actually accomplishes. Yes, Campfield gets to have his “victory,” but I don’t see that this solves the problem he claims to have solved. If you’re on the birth certificate of a child that is not biologically yours, it looks to me like this bill still sticks you with paying for that kid.
I think it’s right that a man who has not legally adopted a kid and is not on a kid’s birth certificate should not be held legally responsible for the kid.
And this law seems to address that. Okay, fine.
But it still doesn’t look to me like it does what Campfield claims that it does. So, it’s hard for me to get upset about it. I’m more confused.
I asked over at Kleinheider’s if someone can explain it.
To make my comment I have to admit that I am totally and completely hooked on ANTM. How embarrassing for me. What can I say, I can’t turn away from the freak show that is Tyra Banks. She confuses me so much that I keep watching. Well, Nigel is a hunk (yes, a mildly creepy hunk) and I love how Jay wears a full face of make-up but is still quite manly. There’s just so much interesting stuff there, if you look past the models.
Anyhow, what I think is really funny about Terry Frank’s post is that the story behind the photo is one she’d probably really support. Although, it might be fair to say that that story is not clearly conveyed only by looking at the picture. It was a stupid photo shoot that is typical of the kind of shit Tyra talks all the time. Girls are growing up so fast these days. Oh the tragedy. So here the models were each portraying the fun of playground games while overcoming the bad girls acting like they’re adults and getting into trouble girls in the background. We’re supposed to like the foreground so much that we extend our childhoods and avoid the traps the of the drunk pregnant girls who don’t look so pretty and nice.
It’s just that particular line of thinking that certain people fall prey to. I find it more and more common in the Evangelical Right (a term I hate but don’t know another way to phrase it for others to understand what I’m talking about.)
The syllogism goes like this.
1. We are saved by the only saviour, God’s Son.
2. That makes us God’s Heirs.
3. That means we inherit God’s characteristics, including the ability to discern what is Right from what is Wrong.
Because they approach things with that mindset they not only think they are Junior Jesus In Training but that everyone else who is not saved is a subspecies, not unlike a dog or a cat.
And then it gets further corrupted. Some people cannot be saved; Feminists, Homosexuals and Democrats are among the list of the unsaveable.
I can’t count the number of times my mom has been sceptical of someone’s Christianity when she finds out they vote Democrat.
Anyway, so they tend to think that all the unsaved and unsaveable are running around colluding on the destruction of society.
I have no idea how Christianity got corrupted into this monstrous heresy. (Okay, I have some idea but it involves a lot of inside baseball and Francis Schaeffer.)
And, doesn’t it have to be gay men who judge beauty contests since most heterosexual men aren’t all that interested in the beauty standards women impose on ourselves and each other and yet we seek male approval and so can’t just have women judging each other?
I’ll enlist B. But I ain’t judging no beauty contests…
Pingback: Positive Reinforcement : Post Politics: Political News and Views in Tennessee
I’m here at the ready, dressed in my fatigues and combat boots, B! (I mean, I was wearing them anyway, but never you mind why.)
And that is why I love you guys. No worries, there will be no beauty contest judging in my army. Shoot, I’d rather we all sat around drinking beers and having farting contests rather than wasting our time with that crap.
Actually, I was just in her eatery recently. While talking about the Daily Show she told me that she and Lee have only the very basic cable package of 12 stations. she probably heard about it on the net and watched it on Youtube.
It’s on network up here — if you can call the CW a network.
Where do I sign up to do your bidding?