Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

* Kazakhstan expert Steve Bodio renders his long-awaited verdict on "Borat." Jane Galt thinks she'll be skipping the movie.

* Software for nappers.

* All you need to know about modernism, at least from the British point of view.

* Mike Jones -- the male escort Ted Haggard did meth (and more) with -- tells Radar magazine, "We never discussed religion." I'll bet they didn't! Great exchange:

What turned Reverend Haggard on the most about you?

I think my body, for sure. Also, it probably didn't hurt that I'm pretty well-endowed.

* '70s softcore queen Sylvia Kristel is interviewed by Amazon.co.uk, of all people.

* When I take photos with my cam-phone, the results look like an Instamatic was shooting through pantyhose. When Hugh Symonds takes photos with his cam-phone, the results look worthy of framing.

* Alice posts an evocative, painterly photograph of Brighton. Writingwise, Alice isn't just participating in NaNoWriMo, she's speedblogging about speedwriting her novel. But then merry words do just seem to spill out of Alice ...

* Mystery writer Sandra Scoppetone visits a B&N and discovers that none of her 18 books are on sale there.

* Reid Farmer points out one of the perils of being an agriculturalist.

* Someone at Rutgers is dreading what the school's administration is considering inflicting on that ancient campus. (Link thanks to Christopher.) Eloquent passage:

Will visitors two centuries from now see something else? Something resembling the airports and shopping malls and urban ugliness of early-21st-century America? A campus that looks like a abandoned set from Star Wars? Or one built in the neo-Corbu "modern brutalism" of twentieth century penitentiaries? Or the bizarre personal fantasies of architects trying to imitate the postmodern "originality" of charlatans like Venturi and Gehry?

* DarkoV won't forget to spin some good discs at his Thanksgiving dinner.

* So maybe social interaction is more varied and rewarding in the 'burbs than it is in the city? Or maybe not?

* Prairie Mary asks: In the middle of the culture wars, what becomes of the animals?

* Thanks to Alan Little, who passed along this amusing survey asking the question we've all been eager to hear the answer to: Is attending yoga classes a good way to meet a romantic partner?

* Those one-pic-a-day-of-myself timelapse-movies people were making? Here's an entertaining variation on them. (Link thanks to Charlton Griffin.)

Best,

Michael

Borat's hilarious. His ethnicity is incidental. Did Rhode Islanders complain en masse about Jim Carrey's portrayal of them in Dumb and Dumber?

Posted by: phil on November 18, 2006 9:38 AM

In re the Ted Haggard bit.

I'm 56 years old. I cannot fathom why a man would want to have sex with another man.

The constant hysteria about homosexuality, the current fashion of worshipping homosexuality... what in the hell is it all about?

Has anybody besides me noticed that men have penises and women have vaginas? Is it possible to take a clue from this?

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on November 18, 2006 10:09 AM

Phil -- Humor is almost always fun to think about, isn't it? Why does it work for some people and not for others, that kind of thing. The Wife and I co-write satirical stuff that we put on in front of audiences. Always fascinating to notice which jokes work and which don't. Sometimes people laugh loudest at stuff we hadn't thought was a joke, which is double-perplexing (though great.)

ST -- I'm as straight as can be but I can semi-imagine my way into finding guys appealing, if only because they represent getting away from chicks with all their needs and whininess and feelings ... Still, there are moments when the whole world seems to be going gay, aren't there? What's that about? But what confounds me more than the having-sex-with-guys thing is the doing-meth thing. Why would anyone older than about 17 even consider doing meth? It's hard on a body. After the age of 25, don't most people think a little more in terms of enjoying and nourishing rather than punishing their bodies?

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on November 18, 2006 10:50 AM

Whoops, Michael, you slipped on the orthodoxy banana there in your comments. Gays were just born that way. It's bigotry to notice that the Peter Pan stereotype is a reality, and that gay men actually become gay for the purpose of avoiding responsibility for women and children. The "stereotype" is a stereotype, as is usually the case, because it is true. But, you're forbidden to say it.

I've been reading reviews of Borat, although I haven't seen it. Lately, I've been listening to the Raw Dog channel of Sirius radio. Ethnic and sexual humor is alive and well. Since it is forbidden to speak the truth in the office or in school, laughing out loud at the stereotypes becomes an irresistible form of humor.

The young think that the leftist indoctrination in the glamour of homosexuality is new. It isn't. That indoctrination was already standard practice when I entered the University of Illinois as an undergraduate in 1968. For years, I actually bought into it. Living among gay men in San Francisco and New York City... well, how can you ignore the obvious? All the stereotypes are absolutely true.

After almost 40 years of observing the supposedly fabulous and fashionable gay community of New York City, I must say that I've never seen a drearier, more conformist group of people anywhere.

The Karoake Queen, like me, has many gay friends, who we tolerate. Her son signed up for full scale cable TV a couple of months ago. The Queen was channel surfing and she happened across one of those weighty HBO documentaries about gay men engaging in sex, which included graphic footage (for educational purposes only, of course).

"Oh, that's disgusting!" the Queen said. "I like gay men, but how can anybody do anything that disgusting?"

That's the problem, isn't it? Although the gay community is fond of tossing off the "homophobia" insult, the truth is that the rest of us aren't afraid of homosexuality... we're disgusted by it. And, it is hilariously disgusting.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on November 19, 2006 8:56 AM

Thanks for the link, Michael. I guess you could say take care of your poop or it will take care of you!

Posted by: Reid Farmer on November 19, 2006 11:10 AM

Oh gosh, thanks for the link, was just having an extremely lazy weekend there so you just motivated me to get over there and start whacking out some more of those seemingly endless thousands of words...

Posted by: Alice Bachini on November 19, 2006 2:12 PM

A big yell out to Michael and a thank you for the link from the kitchen. A comment on my post had me wondering.
How many of 2 Blowhards readers tend to have music on when they're having a big meal, say like Thanksgiving? And if you don't have it on, is it because you're somewhere other than your own home?

Posted by: DarkoV on November 19, 2006 8:38 PM

Jeez, Thomas, there are plenty of straight men out there who want sex without responsibility. True that women will rarely give it to them unless they are A) celebrities, B) gorgeous, or C) super charming and good liars, but that doesn't change things. People seem to have little control over their sexual desires. I've seen five year old kids who were so effeminate that you knew they were going to be gay (and indeed they turned out to be); I don't think they understood family responsibilites at that point.

Speaking of gay men and straight women, I found this quote from the yoga link hilarious:

"If you’re a gay man wanting to meet another gay man, go up and talk to him right away. Men have short attention spans. If you’re a straight man interested in meeting a woman, talk to her for three months, then ask her for a cup of tea. After having tea four or five times, then ask her out on a date."

From a straight man's perspective...sooo true! Probably more like three weeks than three months, but investment is definitely required.

Posted by: MQ on November 20, 2006 4:01 AM

Reverand Haggard---I mean, what a loser, all the way around. NOT because he's "gay." But why would a gay man become a member of a clergy and a political party who hates gay men? And then do meth. Although perhaps the meth was necessary to being Republican. It's like a joke Dennis Miller once told: he hears these people on talk shows say things like "It's hell being a gay man in Mississippi..." and he thinks "If you are a gay man in Mississippi...get the hell out of Mississippi!"

Posted by: annette on November 20, 2006 9:48 AM

So, *annette, people come in packages?
If he's gay, it follows he is a Democrat/doesn't live in Mississippi?
Had it occur to you some might join a political party based on ideas, not pack associations?
And who said Republicans, as a party, hate homosexuals?

Look, here is one example of gay, funny, talented, New Yorker and a Republican. And I know many more.

Didn't they teach you in college to be more open-minded?

Posted by: Tat on November 20, 2006 10:14 AM

Raise your hand if you're sick of Tat's ENDLESSLY snotty lecturing tone. You're hardly an example of "open-minded"---although perhaps a TERRIFIC example of why people hated the Soviets. No, people don't come in packages. And some people hate gays. More on average live in Mississippi. You can obviously live in Mississippi and be gay---but then don't bitch about it. And I'm assuming your funny, talented gay Republican friend doesn't give a damn about gay marriage because that in fact is an idea of the Republicans. As was the anti-sodomy-only-for-homosexuals law passed by the highly Republican legislature in Texas. Part of their platform. What they claim to stand for. So if they've joined them for their "ideas", it appears some self-loathing would be involved. Or they just don't care about sex or marriage, which I guess is possible, but makes them slightly less charming and lovely than you describe.

Posted by: annette on November 20, 2006 2:22 PM

Hey bitch, you wanna piece of me?
Then come alone, don't ask for your pack's booing and cheering. Too Soviet of you, loser. You don't know who you're messing with, you little amateur: I was tempered by the masters.

And as to Soviets themselves- I am the one who hates them,; remember - I came here as a political refugee from socialist system to a capitalist one, and you had a f*cking nerve to lecture me on "equal" rights of immigrants.

You're the one who lick Soviet's asses, the one who wants to turn this country into the neo-socialist "paradise".
Ask me if I care what you and your buddies think, if that process is theoretically possible in your perpetual head-up-your-ass position.

Posted by: Tat on November 20, 2006 11:04 PM

For the slow on the intake:further, comprehensible explanation.

Posted by: Tat on November 21, 2006 11:48 AM

Drawing a parallel between the Soviet Union and American liberalism / the Democratic party is at least as silly as drawing a parallel between the Soviet Union and American conservatism / the Republican party.

Posted by: MQ on November 21, 2006 5:50 PM

Tat--you proved my point better than I ever could have!

Posted by: annette on November 27, 2006 11:06 AM






Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember your info?