piminnowcheez
report this user
May 13 piminnowcheez commented on Everything Falls Apart in High-Rise.
I walked out of this movie.

I went in ready to love it: I love Tom Hiddleston, and especially naked Tom Hiddleston; love the 70s art direction, share the politics. But I do not love lazy filmmaking, which is what this was. There's only so many slow-motion, drink-splashing, crazy-dancing party scenes I can watch before it gets old: we get it, they're decadent. There's only so much plot-irrelevant graphic violence I can stomach and only so many strikes to the head with heavy-handed allegory I can take before I decide, oh, I see, if it weren't for the fucking and the killing, this would be a movie meant for children. I've liked a few Ben Wheatley movies before this one. Now I'll probably never watch another.
Apr 9 piminnowcheez commented on I Missed the Irony in Calvin Trillin's Poem in the New Yorker but, Ironically, It's Still a Bad Poem.
To the people in Rich's life who love him: It's time for an intervention.

If Rich is any kind of decent person, the day will come when he will remember this whole business with painful embarrassment.
Apr 6 piminnowcheez commented on Calvin Trillin's Nostalgia for a White Planet.
This *has* to be pure trolling, b/c otherwise it's the single dumbest thing I've ever read on Slog. To think that people complain about Charles. In order:

1) Maybe you want to look up "beguiled" before you use it again; I don't think it means what you think it means.

2) "wonders if there are in fact other Chinese provinces—how could he ever find out" Haha, get it? Because Trillin is OLD, he's never heard of the Google, see? Nostalgia for a young planet, right Rich? (See also, "resting on stereotypes") But seriously, obviously this poem, like so many, was written because Trillin actually didn't know the answer to the question posed.

3) Do let's talk a little shop: "If there's a rhyme that's ever reached harder than "in the loop / whose insides were soup" does, then I don't know it." I take this to mean you've never listened to any pop music. If you want to talk about reaching hard, consider the knot you've tied yourself into to find the most mean-spirited possible way to interpret a light, blandly amusing bit of doggerel by an 80 year old food writer who started his career by writing about the integration of black students in the south.

4) "he does use the archaic word fret in order to satisfy a rhyme request" Hey, a young friend of mine who knows how to use the Google taught me this trick: type "fret" into google search and specify the "news" results. You can totally see how "fret" is archaic and nobody but 19th century Hugh Jackman uses it anymore.

5)"The poem ends by longing for the days when "we"—one has to presume white Americans" I dunno, maybe *one* has to, but *I* was kind of thinking he meant food writers...

6) "does this poem rest on an unexamined racist sentiment?" Does this post rest on an unexamined ageist sentiment? Or just a writing deadline paired with no familiarity at all with Trillin's writing?

Ugh, there's too much stupid here to keep going point-wise. If you want to know what Trillin was getting at, it was in a line Rich chose not to quote:
"Could a place we extolled as a find/Be revealed as one province behind?"

It's the stress of constant change, as the world keeps moving on at its pace while we inevitably slow down and grow tired, expressed here from the point of view of an American food writer. If this poem were written by a tech writer, it could be about DOS and UNIX versus the wide world of mobile apps; if it were by a sex advice columnist, it could be about the days when questions about whether to kiss on the first date outnumbered questions about pegging technique and etiquette. Longing for the *perceived* simplicity of previous times as one gets older is a universal human experience, that thing which both good and bad poets often try to capture. It's a conceit of the young to think everyone at every time should have the benefit of the same knowledge and perspective available now. Check your privilege, Rich!
More...
Feb 17 piminnowcheez commented on New Head of Kinsey Institute: "I think human sexuality must be viewed in the context of relationships.".
I'm encouraged by her taste in office decor: "Instead of pictures of prairie voles or an actual animal or two, black-and-white photos from the Kinsey Institute collection grace her walls: a Robert Mapplethorpe of two men embracing, a Herb Ritts photo of Olympic diver Greg Louganis."

The comment @37 (with the lesson about scientific method) seems to assume a lot about Carter that is not in evidence, e.g.: "Carter is talking about humans as if they are as monogamous as monogamous voles"

No she isn't. The whole point of the vole research is that some voles are monogamous and some aren't -- just like people -- and in the end it turns out that the expression of oxytocin receptors (where and in what density) in the brain is what makes the difference. It's a perfectly reasonable hypothesis to suggest that maybe that's what's different in people who tend toward monogamy and those who don't, too. I don't see anywhere in the article where Carter implies that humans are like the monogamous voles and not the other kind. I don't see any anywhere in the article that she's promoting a sex-is-only-for-pair-bonding agenda.

If anyone is seriously worried about this, I encourage you to actually read the USA piece (more carefully than Dan did) down to the part where she actually talks about the research she wants to do at Kinsey. There are no hidden "promise rings" here.

Again, this is a stupid post (sorry Dan, love ya anyway) and @37 is an unwarranted slander of Sue Carter as a scientist.

As for the hiding the big humunculus cock, the kinds of senior scientists who run institutes have to be part politician, and it's easy for me to imagine that she might have the kind of gue$t$ in her office who wouldn't want a cock in their face and whose sensibilities she would feel inclined to protect. Unnecessary, maybe, but it doesn't make her a prude.
More...
Feb 15 piminnowcheez commented on New Head of Kinsey Institute: "I think human sexuality must be viewed in the context of relationships.".
On the one hand, I am, like Dan, a middle-aged fag, and one who's been reading and listening to Dan's output for a long time, and can't remember the last time I disagreed with him on a question of sexual morality.

On the other hand, I'm also a neuroscientist, familiar with the prairie vole research, and committed to the notion that brain and behavioral research in (other) animals tells us useful things about humans.

And man, is he ever off-base on this one. It is simply a fact of the matter that for some animals -- prairie voles, bonobos, humans -- sex is tied up with (not equal to!) affiliative behaviors that are important for survival even though not directly related to reproduction. As a scientist -- a gay, lefty one -- of course this should be part of the scientific study of sexual behavior. Reading through the quotes here, I can't find anything wrong with what this new director is saying.
Jan 28, 2015 piminnowcheez commented on Andrew Sullivan Announces That He Will Stop Blogging.
every day

with a space in the middle
Jan 27, 2015 piminnowcheez commented on Savage Sitcom Sells to ABC.
29: I would watch the shit out of that
Aug 16, 2013 piminnowcheez commented on SL Letter of the Day: POOP!.
The whole cheerful, "Cheers mate!" business makes it a whole level more creepy.
Aug 1, 2013 piminnowcheez commented on SLLOTD: Helping a Little Brother Out.
First of all, if this kid is 14, he's definitely interested in sex, even if he's not showing any outward interest in girls (or boys). There's a weird period in puberty for many people (I think) where the hormones are definitely going to work, and your friends are behaving differently, and even if you're a late bloomer, and even if you don't know shit about sex, you are definitely, if privately, growing into a new set of interests.

Second, sure, I can imagine it would be embarrassing for both parties for a big sister to talk to a little brother about sex, but so what. You have the talk, everybody's embarrassed, nobody dies, the information is passed. 23 and 14 sounds like a good age spread to minimize embarrassment anyway.

I think if I were trying to tell a 14 year old boy something useful about sex, the bases I'd try to cover are:

1) Being out of your mind with horniness is normal, don't worry about it; ditto with wanking. But learn how not to be gross in public.

2) Porn is fine enough but understand it doesn't, and isn't meant to, represent real sex. That thing you're dreaming of having does not look like what you're looking at online. There's no reason this needs to be a disappointment. Fantasy sex and real sex are good and different things.

3) When the real sex comes along, there's a real person attached to it. You don't treat real people like online porn wank objects. Besides being the decent thing to do, the sex is also better when you give a shit.
More...
Apr 26, 2013 piminnowcheez commented on Next Up in the Slog Netflix Streaming Club: The Young Girls Of Rochefort.
I found this movie hard to sit through (impossible, actually, were it not for a summertime outdoor screening and a bottle of pink wine), but I have to agree with Fnarf about men in white pants and that fucking awesome cafe.