Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label evolution

Trebek: "How to trigger wannabe 'macho men.'" Contestant: "What is the Gillette commercial?"

For 30 years Gillette's tagline has been, "Gillette - the best a man can get!" In the razor giant's latest commercial, however, they've altered said tagline to, "the best men can be." It attempts to tackle the issue of toxic masculinity, as in the first half of the ad it portrays men fighting, bullying, and harassing others, before in the second half showcasing men who intervene on fights, help to prevent bullying, and stand up for women. Throughout the ad's duration, the narrator utters these words: "Is this the best a man can get? Is it? You can't hide from it. It's been going on for far too long. We can't laugh it off. Making the same old excuses. Boys will be boys. But something finally changed. And there will be no going back. Because we, we believe in the best in men. To say the right thing. To act the right way. Some already are. In ways big and small. But some is not enough. Because the boys watching today will be the men o...

More focus should be placed on who people have become than on who people were

We're all human, and as humans, we've all made mistakes. Given that, it's not so much about the mistakes we make; it's about learning from said mistakes and improving as individuals due to them. So why does it seem many spend more time judging others based upon their past mistakes than seeing the evolution which they've undertaken? I'm a firm believer that change is possible. Alcoholics and drug abusers have gone sober. Racists have seen the light and gone on to become spokespeople for organizations fighting against racial discrimination. There have even been times when once violent individuals got to the root of their anger with a counselor, underwent a lifestyle change, and became loving, peaceful people. Change can happen, especially if you believe it. Like with everything else, social media has its pros and cons. One con is the almost mafia-like mentality some in social media have when a story breaks about a celebrity. A recent example revolves around st...

The one thing you never tell a guy...

You can tell a guy to shut-up, f*ck off, that he's an idiot, but there's one thing should never, under any circumstance, say to him: To man up. I was told this for the first time in my 37 years the other day, and while it's difficult to rile me, that got my blood boiling (figuratively, of course). The phrase man up  is incredibly sexist to both genders. What's the opposite of that? Woman down? What in hell does that mean? A woman should be entirely submissive and obey her man's every wish? What year is this again? The phrase also paints an incredibly stereotypical, old-school mindset, where men are seen as the providers, the stronger of the two sexes, assertive, powerful, and rich. If a male cries, even after his mother passes away, that's not acceptable and he needs to "man up." On the opposite end, if a woman doesn't cry during such an occasion, she's seen as unladylike, meaning there has to be something seriously wrong with her. I'm so...

Bill Maher is woke about John Hughes

I have a love-hate relationship with HBO personality and fellow progressive Bill Maher. While I tend to agree with his viewpoints approximately 80% of the time, my opinions run in stark contrast to his the other 20%. Even when I do agree with him on a subject, there's a good chance he'll go so overboard with a rant, it'll make me cringe as a result. Having said all that, I definitely agree with what he said regarding Hollywood's evolution of wokeness in Friday's episode of Real Time . Apparently, Molly Ringwald of the John Hughes teen classic, Breakfast Club , has recently said, in hindsight, she finds that film and others like it to be troubling in the age of the #MeToo movement. Maher responded by saying, "Stop being surprised every time you watch an old movie or TV show and find some of the ideas in it are - old." He added, "It's nuts to blame someone for not being 'woke' 30 years before 'woke' became a thing. I remember the...

"My favorite band is back!"

I always find it interesting when ardent fans of a band or musician, when pleased with a new record, will say, "He/She/They're back!" This is typically in response to the band's new sound showing traces of their old sound. I find this perplexing, as while it's common for listeners to want musicians to continually evolve, they also commonly want them to stay the same. Yes, regardless of how brilliant the musician, this can prove to be next to impossible. I understand this mindset to a certain extent. There's typically that one song or one album which first drew our attention to a band, prompted us to fall in love with them musically, and as the saying goes, the rest is history. Due to that, regardless of the number of directions in which the band has traveled since that point, I can understand feeling the urge to again hear that sound which grabbed one's attention in the first place. However, the band never left. If every group rehashed the same material ...

When attempted cleverness and typos collide

As anyone who puts their pants on one leg at a time should know by now, I often times write and talk about current events, especially when it comes to the world of politics. Based on the current definitions of the terms, most people view me as an uber-liberal Democrat, but I view myself as a pragmatic progressive independent who leans Democrat. I didn't come to be this way because of parental influence. My father's always been an independent, has voted every such way, and while he may be progressive at his core, he never talked politics to my brother or I when we were growing up. His side of the family leaned Democrat, but rarely ever spoke about politics when my brother or I were around during the holidays. My mother's side of the family, on the other hand, has leaned Republican, has been more outspoken about their political beliefs, but outside of her since passed father, they've tried to stray away from such discussions when my brother and I have been in town. My mot...

I highly recommend checking out the French film "Evolution"!

I love cinema, and as a lover of cinema, I like to believe I'm pretty open when it comes to the art of filmmaking. While I, like most everyone, have genre favorites and least favorites, I try to view and appreciate selections from each (well, besides porn). Regardless of the genre, however, there rarely comes a time when a film "wows" me - meaning a film significantly impacts me on a mental or an emotional level (or both), to the point of goosebumps and my mind being unable to shift its attention away from the viewing for several hours or even days. Well, this happened to me recently while viewing the 2016 French film, Evolution , and I felt the need to sing its praises. Here's a summary of the film, posted on movie-review site, Rotten Tomatoes : "10-year-old Nicolas lives with his mother on a remote island, in a village inhabited by women and young boys. In a hospital overlooking the ocean, all the boys are subjected to a strange medical treatment. Only Nicol...

When did being labeled an "elitist" become such a bad thing?

When debating someone yesterday, I got called an elitist because I used big words and stuff. The odd thing about the comment was the fact it was meant to be an insult. I've heard many conservatives refer to President Obama in such a manner over the years. My question is, when did being labeled an elitist  become such a bad thing? Here's the definition of the term: "(of a person or class of persons) considered superior by others or by themselves, as in intellect, talent, power, wealth, or position in society." So, once again, why is it now an insult to call someone an elitist? If we use the before definition, this is how the insult comes across: "I hate you! Other people consider your intellect so superior! Yeah, take that!" Imagine how ridiculous we'd sound if we used other at least somewhat complimentary terms as insults. Here are a few examples: - "Oh yeah?!? You think that, do ya?!? Well, fine then, but at least I'm not beautiful l...

What is with the Golden State bashing?

I have to say it's been a strange year in sports, especially when it comes to teams striving to break records. Almost exactly a year ago, the Kentucky men's basketball team finished an unbeaten regular season by winning the SEC tournament, yet questions came pouring in about how good this team was compared to previous John Calipari coached teams, how they would have ranked amongst the best teams of all time, and whether or not playing in the mediocre SEC detracted from their accomplishments. The Clemson Tigers went to the national championship game as the only remaining unbeaten team in all of college football, yet since they played in the ACC, they were often met with skepticism. When the Carolina Panthers started the year 14-0 and seemed to be well on their way to an unbeaten regular season, they were also met by plenty of doubters, in large part due to their division, the NFC South. Now we have the Golden State Warriors, who, at 52-5, are currently one game ahead of the ...

There aren't two sides to every debate

I'm growing a little tired of the phrase, "There are two sides to every debate," because it's simply not true and needs to stop being treated as such. Granted, at one time, there may have been two sides to every debate, yet it's foolish to think that what we debated 1,500 years ago should still be debated today. There was once debate on whether the earth was flat or round. That debate's now over. There's absolutely no point in further debating the matter. The issue was talked about at length for years and once the facts came in, it became clear that the earth was indeed round. So it'd be absolutely foolish for CNN to give equal airtime to a person whom accurately states that the earth is round and a person whom incorrectly states that the earth is flat. That's perhaps the biggest problem with regard to the there-are-two-sides-to-every-debate theory - most "news" networks feel it's necessary to provide equal time to both sides of a...

Nick Saban's bad analogy

I've got nothing against Alabama head coach Nick Saban. Without much debate, he's the best college football coach in the game today, and he could very well go down as one of the greatest college coaches in the history of the game when all is said and done. In saying all of that, however, I don't buy that he's trying to slow the game down for the players' safety, so much as I think he's doing it because he is having trouble adjusting to the up-tempo teams. I also think the analogy he pulled out of his backside regarding the issue the other day was quite ridiculous as well. Speaking to ESPN.com, Saban said this: "The fastball guys (up-tempo coaches) say there's no data out there, and I guess you have to use some logic. What's the logic? If you smoke one cigarette, do you have the same chances of getting cancer if you smoke 20? I guess there's no study that specifically says that. But logically, we would say, 'Yeah, there probably is.'...

Another conservative attempts to explain why she was bothered by the Coke commercial

I'm really getting tired of all this negative talk surrounding the Coca-Cola Super Bowl commercial, but read another article today which has me scratching my head and wondering what planet some people are from. The article, titled, "Culture: The problem with the Coke ad: You don't get to invent your own definition of America," comes courtesy of Sarah Barnes of CainTV  (yes, Herman Cain). One part of the article which stood out to me was this: "That's ironic, because failure to communicate is exactly the problem with this ad. We no longer communicate if communicating means defining anything. Nothing has a definition because everyone now invents their own definition for everything. And that's what Coke did in this ad: It invented a new definition for America. That's a problem, because America actually has a real definition connected to its founding and history. And we need the America of that definition. The real one." That is ironic, bec...

Dating dilemma for nice guys...

I've written about this before, but it's been on my mind quite a bit recently and I would like to sort out my thoughts on the matter. On Friday night, I posted a status on Facebook which read, "Craig Rozniecki has got this always-a-friend-never-a-boyfriend thing down to a science. He may have to start teaching classes on it." I received a response from a guy which said something like, "You've got to kind of be a dickhead. Sadly, it works." I talked to a distant cousin of mine, an older lady, about this and the aspect of a "challenge" and she said that sadly, yes, young people in particular seem to be attracted to that. Looking at the past two women I pursued and two whom kind of pursued me, they all have something in common - they have a history of dating, for lack of a better word, dickheads. They've admitted this. When they haven't and have described to me the men they were dating, how they treated and spoke to them, I could d...

The Evolution/Devolution of Green Day

I've seen (heard, I suppose is the more appropriate word) it many times, when a band enters a point in their career where they seemingly lose the identity they had which brought them an initial appeal to listeners. In some cases, bands are labeled as "matured," as they transition from a raw, less-produced, perhaps more emotional and personal-style of music to more cliched, overly produced, radio-friendly rock. Often times, I see the term "matured" as synonymous with "monotone," "repetitious" and "business over pleasure". Two bands that immediately come to mind for me are Linkin Park and Nine Inch Nails. The rap/rock hybrid of the early 2000s played into Linkin Park's hands and they tended to stand out on their own from the rest of the like-minded bands of the time. But, over the last 10 years and with each successive album, they've put much less emphasis on the rap and more on the singing, making them sound more like an ev...