Love love loving:
http://helloboys.tumblr.com
Thank you ladies.
Hello!!
5 years ago
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Market Research
Does this picture in any way inspire you to join the Time Out Fitness Centre?
Nope, me neither...
Nope, me neither...
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Flu-induced-feminist-contemplations
In my flu-induced-delusion I decided to watch 'Hitch.' The premise (for those who haven't seen this piece of cinematic genius)goes something likes this:
Dating Dr (Will Smith) takes conventionally-physically-unattractive, shy, awkward guys (who are of course sweet and caring on the inside) and one way or another ensures that the conventionally-physically-attractive woman of their choice learns to look beyond the superficiality of appearance and fall in love with them.
The rest of the plot is highly predictable and of no importance here.
There is of course nothing wrong with the feel-good message of looking beyond appearance and loving people for who they are, not what they look like. However it struck me, lying awake in a flu-induced bout of insomnia, that in movies, stories, fairy tales, (society?), it is consistently the female characters who must overcome what is often physical revulsion in order to learn to love the man for 'himself', thus revealing his true inner beauty.
Beauty and the Beast and the story of the Frog Prince are classic examples.
And there aren't many stories of attractive men learning to love physically "unattractive" women for their personalities.
Men are allowed to be fat and still found attractive - eg. Charlotte's 2nd hubby in Sex and the City, Albert in 'Hitch'.
Women are allowed to be beautiful but poor and dirty (Cinderella) - nothing a hot bath won't fix - but men, we are told, are not able to fall in love with "unattractive", let alone fat, women unless the woman has undergone a major physical transformation, rendering her beautiful.
I'd be really interested to hear what other examples you can think of relating to this theme - either supporting or contradicting.
It seems to me that yet again women are being taught they must strive constantly for physical 'perfection' (whatever that means) in order to find a 'good' guy, which they will only do when they stop making judgments based on physical appearance. Meanwhile men are told they can look anyway they like, be a good guy, and still get the hot girl.
Maybe men are just more literal: they don't see the beauty until they see the beauty.
If anyone's seen that Jack Black/Gwen Paltrow/fat-suit movie I'd love you to tell me how it relates to this so I don't have to watch it.
Dating Dr (Will Smith) takes conventionally-physically-unattractive, shy, awkward guys (who are of course sweet and caring on the inside) and one way or another ensures that the conventionally-physically-attractive woman of their choice learns to look beyond the superficiality of appearance and fall in love with them.
The rest of the plot is highly predictable and of no importance here.
There is of course nothing wrong with the feel-good message of looking beyond appearance and loving people for who they are, not what they look like. However it struck me, lying awake in a flu-induced bout of insomnia, that in movies, stories, fairy tales, (society?), it is consistently the female characters who must overcome what is often physical revulsion in order to learn to love the man for 'himself', thus revealing his true inner beauty.
Beauty and the Beast and the story of the Frog Prince are classic examples.
And there aren't many stories of attractive men learning to love physically "unattractive" women for their personalities.
Men are allowed to be fat and still found attractive - eg. Charlotte's 2nd hubby in Sex and the City, Albert in 'Hitch'.
Women are allowed to be beautiful but poor and dirty (Cinderella) - nothing a hot bath won't fix - but men, we are told, are not able to fall in love with "unattractive", let alone fat, women unless the woman has undergone a major physical transformation, rendering her beautiful.
I'd be really interested to hear what other examples you can think of relating to this theme - either supporting or contradicting.
It seems to me that yet again women are being taught they must strive constantly for physical 'perfection' (whatever that means) in order to find a 'good' guy, which they will only do when they stop making judgments based on physical appearance. Meanwhile men are told they can look anyway they like, be a good guy, and still get the hot girl.
Maybe men are just more literal: they don't see the beauty until they see the beauty.
If anyone's seen that Jack Black/Gwen Paltrow/fat-suit movie I'd love you to tell me how it relates to this so I don't have to watch it.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
more notsopassiveagressivenotes.com
I really think this sign
and this sign
sum up the difference between the NT and pretty much the rest of Australia.
In the Northern Territory there will be thinly veiled threats of violence.
In Sydney there will be very specific threats of weak decaf 1/2 skim 1/2 soy coffees.
and this sign
sum up the difference between the NT and pretty much the rest of Australia.
In the Northern Territory there will be thinly veiled threats of violence.
In Sydney there will be very specific threats of weak decaf 1/2 skim 1/2 soy coffees.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
CROC FREE ZONE!
After a week away from Darwin I returned to discover that the NT Government appears to be seriously considering the possibility of establishing a 50km Croc Free Zone around Darwin city.
Of all the ludicrous...
I was initially convinced this must be some sort of NT News scare-mongering/ sensationalism and have been trying to confirm it is as some sort of late April Fool's day joke ever since. Sadly, it appears to be quite serious.
How can the NTG and Federal Govt agree to the compulsory killing of crocodile now when last year the Fed Govt stood in the way of managed, profitable safari hunting (which would have provided employment and income for Traditional Owners who supported it) because Steve Irwin convinced them it was cruel? Also it is virtually unenforceable and exposes the Govt to potential litigation from idiots who think getting in the water up here is safe. The NT News has run a whole serious of headlines entitled things like 'More Croc Idiots!' illustrating what unnecessary risks people take. While I realise this is not exactly Walkley Award winning journalism, they have a point.
And what about the journalists?! What will the NT News do? Does this mean we should expect more headlines like Wednesday the 15th's : PICTURES! MY DOG ATE MY G-STRING!
UPDATE: When you google 'croc free zone darwin' the very first item is entitled 'croc-free-zone idea ludicrous'. Great minds ABC, great minds...
Of all the ludicrous...
I was initially convinced this must be some sort of NT News scare-mongering/ sensationalism and have been trying to confirm it is as some sort of late April Fool's day joke ever since. Sadly, it appears to be quite serious.
How can the NTG and Federal Govt agree to the compulsory killing of crocodile now when last year the Fed Govt stood in the way of managed, profitable safari hunting (which would have provided employment and income for Traditional Owners who supported it) because Steve Irwin convinced them it was cruel? Also it is virtually unenforceable and exposes the Govt to potential litigation from idiots who think getting in the water up here is safe. The NT News has run a whole serious of headlines entitled things like 'More Croc Idiots!' illustrating what unnecessary risks people take. While I realise this is not exactly Walkley Award winning journalism, they have a point.
And what about the journalists?! What will the NT News do? Does this mean we should expect more headlines like Wednesday the 15th's : PICTURES! MY DOG ATE MY G-STRING!
UPDATE: When you google 'croc free zone darwin' the very first item is entitled 'croc-free-zone idea ludicrous'. Great minds ABC, great minds...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
