Quantcast

On Mad Men: When Pretending Is Your Job

@14578514@twitter That's got nothing to do with Don leaving, it was decided before that. There was basically a whole episode discussing what the agency should be called last series, the upshot was that Don, Jim and Ted would all agree to lose their names for simplicity.

Posted on April 23, 2014 at 5:03 am 0

On 10 Years, Actually: Harry & Karen, David & Natalie, John & Judy

@melis No need to be rude. I like his writing a lot, I just said I found the language thing jarring. Why is my opinion wrong?

Posted on November 8, 2013 at 7:51 pm 1

On 10 Years, Actually: Harry & Karen, David & Natalie, John & Judy

@Bobby Finger OK sorry did not get that! I suppose it's just that I loved the idea, and then all the comments on every post were, 'I'm so into this!', and I wanted to be too, but just kept thinking, 'But where IS this? "Highway"?'. (I suppose being 'England for Americans' is in the grand Richard Curtis tradition! :) )

Posted on November 8, 2013 at 3:59 pm 2

On Of 100 Nobel Peace Prize Winners, 15 Have Been Women, None Have Been American Women of Color, None Have Been LGBTQ

What an odd piece. "Shouldn’t the peace community be actively working to undo systems of marginalization and oppression, even if this means taking a hard look inside, at our own systems of exclusion and who is rewarded for their efforts?" Why does she keep saying 'our' and 'we' and 'inside'? The whole thing reads like she doesn't realize the Nobel isn't an American award. Surely she can't think that, but then why does she apparently think it's so vitally important that specifically AMERICAN women are awarded? It seems like blind patriotism thinly disguised as progressive thinking.

Posted on November 8, 2013 at 3:12 pm 0

On 10 Years, Actually: Harry & Karen, David & Natalie, John & Judy

I don't think changing the election years was the problem. 'After being re-elected in 2008, David announced that he wouldn’t seek a third term and would, instead, focus on his campaign promises.' Prime Ministers aren't elected personally, don't 'seek terms', and noone announces they're giving up the party leadership after an election they've just won, or fights an election as PM when they've already said they'll step down immediately after. If you're resigning voluntarily you do it between elections. The whole thing is very jarringly American. The Cornwall bit is nonsensical.

Posted on November 8, 2013 at 2:57 pm 4

On Rihanna On My Mind: Chatting About the "Pour It Up" Video

@Rubyinthedust Firstly, not all the songs I mentioned are old- Diamonds was a year ago, S&M two. The only song compared in the article is Man Down, also 2 years old and more similar to my examples than to the new song. Secondly, I didn't say degrading, it's just icky and dull. That's why I was surprised they got an interesting article out of it.

Posted on October 4, 2013 at 8:07 pm 0

On Rihanna On My Mind: Chatting About the "Pour It Up" Video

@Rubyinthedust But how is this video representing her 'brand'? Almost every other Rihanna video I can think of has her standing/dancing in the centre, not particularly sexualised, and with the impression that she's going to get her way: whether she's ordering around a DJ (Pon de Replay/ Don't Stop the Music) or a lover (S&M/ Only Girl in the World/ What's My Name etc), or just expressing security and confidence (Diamonds/Umbrella/). If I had to describe her 'brand' I'd say something like 'commanding' or 'bossy' or 'in charge'. This one seems the antithesis of what I like about her.

Posted on October 4, 2013 at 6:39 pm 0

On Rihanna On My Mind: Chatting About the "Pour It Up" Video

@iceberg Totally agree with you, I love Rihanna (music-wise also, unlike the writers of this), but I thought this video was horrible. why did it have to be so... bummy? I enjoyed this discussion, but couldn't reconcile it at all with what I was watching.
(also not super-keen on the song)

Posted on October 4, 2013 at 6:18 pm 1

On Disney Princesses Dressed in the Style of the Year Their Movies Came Out

@stuffisthings There's Maid Marian. I think Robin Hood gets knighted at the end? So just a lady. (But she never gets included in these lists. Probably Disney think little girls wouldn't buy fox costumes.) (I would though)

Posted on September 23, 2013 at 3:22 pm 1

On Boy-Crazy But Curious, Dating While Disabled, and Introducing Parents to Your "New Norm"

Re: no. 2. I think one of the main issues with online dating is about whether to 'bother' seeing someone. Obviously in real life, if you really like someone then you'll find a way to get round them living 50 miles away/ having a kid when you don't/ working nights when you work days/ whatever. If you haven't been out yet and don't have any other data points, that seems like a faff. But if you have enough other info to think this person is better than the others, you're like 'No problem! I'll come to you! We'll do it when you can!' etc. I mean, I know this isn't an exact comparison and I hope this doesn't sound flip (I'm not trying to say a disability is like a slightly annoying work schedule), but if you let them know enough to know you're the person they should definitely be going on a date with, not leaving the house won't sound like a problem at all?

Posted on September 17, 2013 at 4:41 pm 1