There are a number of parody videos of these commercials on youtube, which leads me to believe that I’m not alone in my love for them. The varieties of “Baby Come Back” and “Love Stinks” were good, but this ad campaign is the gift that just keeps on giving
On Saturday April 24, I got up at 9 am to stand in line with other people who were buying beer that costs $15 a bottle. Crazy? It sounds it. Once a year, Three Floyds Brewing Company in Munster, Indiana (no, not where the cheese comes from; I checked) sells their famous Dark Lord Beer. People from all over the midwest (and apparently other parts of the United States as well — there was a car from Pennsylvania) stand in line for this beer as it is slowly handed out over a period of six hours. You’re only guaranteed a purchase if you’ve bought a “Golden Ticket” beforehand, with which you can buy 3 beers.
The event ended up being a lot more than just waiting in line (though that took about four hours). Everyone brings their own local brews to trade, and there are tons of homebrewers with samples. I didn’t end up actually tasting the Dark Lord, but the day was totally worth it because it was some of the best people watching I’ve ever seen:
Among the tons of swag I picked up that day was a card that said “Girl’s Pint Out.” I was intrigued by their excellently-designed logo, so I finally checked out their site. They’re:
“an all-female organization that promotes solidarity between beer drinkers of the fairer sex. Through monthly events, field trips, meet-ups and drives, we seek to promote a sophisticated level of beer appreciation among women, and bolster the craft beer industry in general. (Boys are allowed on chains and when dining Alfresco.)”
Okay, cool, have a sense of humor, check. But then they go on to say:
“We will increase our knowledge of beer through collaboration with fellow females, and introduce the uninitiated to superior suds. Women were the original brewers in Sumaria — let’s reclaim our supremacy!“
I kinda hope this is still a joke, because they’ve lost me. Supremacy? How about, acceptance in the beer-loving community? Dark Lord Day was largely attended by men, but there were plenty of women there, and it was really fun for all. This kinda of language mildly frustrates me because even though it’s probably a joke, is it necessary? Sure, form a club, hang out with your girlfriends, learn about beer. Start tossing around words like supremacy, and you make me nervous.
Forget the party. This is what will actually be worth seeing.
A Look at the Met and Brooklyn Museum’s New Fashion Exhibits
A Conversation between Alex and Kate, the best of fashion judgement
Kate: much of this is just ugly and not even interesting.
Alex: it has to be ~subtle. like whoopi matching her toenail color to her dress.
the theme doesn’t really allow for greatness. and diane von furstenberg took the theme waaaaaay too literally.
Kate: yea the theme is both too vague and kinda restrictive.
Alex: ugh doutzen, you’re giving models a bad name.
no one should ever be allowed to wear zac posen. ever.
Kate: she looks like glinda the good witch in her blue period.
Alex: this is the group i want to go to the afterparty with
Kate: is that zoe kravitz? if so, no thankyou.
Alex: it is
Alex: she’s so deep.
Kate: oprah — your hair shouldnt match your skirt
Kate: wait is that why gayle was there– because of oprah cohosting? oh god. why would she cohost?
Apparently Oprah says: “When I walked through the exhibition today, it was emotional for me, especially after coming out of the suffragettes and realizing where we’ve come from. We didn’t have the right to vote a century ago. I turned to Anna and said ‘Tonight, you and I are at the Metropolitan Museum hosting this event.” RLY?! OH RLY?!
Kate: KATY PERRY
you have one-upped katy perry. i bow to you.
Alex: i really like the way blake never fails to prove that blue and orange compliment each other so well.
Kate: the orange being…her skin. i see what you did there.
me: wait a second…KATY PERRY YOUR DRESS LIGHTS UP.
Alex: haha yeah it does.
Alex: she isn’t wearing rodarte though, is she? that’s the only dress i can think of in the past season that lights up.
Kate: its not cited anywhere. it looks a lot better normal; lit up she just makes it trashy.
Apparently katy perrys dress is cute circuit?
wait — dont click the link: it’s painful. “wearable technology”
Alex: hm. that sounds familiar.
hussein chalayan a few seasons ago.
Alex: i like this.
Kate: meh. im mildly bored.
Alex: don’t diss cool asian and mean girl. and chanel can be unfriendly black hottie.
Kate: way to go there. and by there i mean mean girls.
Alex: i go there more than degrassi.
Images via Getty.
In a recent NYT blog post, Timothy Egan wrote a blistering editorial berating Nike for standing by Pittsburgh Steeler, and alleged rapist, Ben Roethlisberger, when even the NFL suspended him and mandated behavioral counseling. 95% of Egan’s arguments are totally on target (and articulately put), particularly the stark contrast between Nike’s treatment of Michael Vick (they dropped him after the dog fighting debacle) and their continued support of Roethlisberger (“Ben continues to be part of the Nike roster of athletes.”) Egan writes,
What, exactly does it take for Nike to dump a jock? Dog-fighting will do it. After Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick pleaded guilty to running a felony dog-fighting ring, Nike took action. “We consider any cruelty to animals inhumane and unacceptable,” the company said at the time. But cruelty to women is O.K. I don’t know how else to read the company’s inconsistent stand. Here is a guy who treats women like garbage, yet a company that boasts of having humane corporate values uses him as their front man. Ditto Tiger Woods. Same with Kobe Bryant after a rape allegation, a case that was later dropped.
After giving Egan all deserved credit for pointing out the obvious hypocrisy and blatant double standard, I have one tiny, nitpicky problem with his article. He continues to include Tiger Woods in his litany of badly behaving superstar athletes. I see where he was going; all of the men share a gigantic sense of entitlement fostered by a buffer zone of wealth, celebrity and an outstanding ability to make a ball go where you want it to go. It seems as though they have a lot in common. Shared douchebaggery aside, when it comes to the treatment of women, Tiger Woods and Ben Roethlisberger do not belong on the same list.
Tiger Woods was a terrible husband, a philanderer and a liar. He may be disrespectful, a lousy role model and in need of counseling and rehab for sex addiction. But of all the women with whom Tiger cheated, none have accused him of rape or assualt. Did he use them? Maybe (probably). Did they use him? Maybe (probably). Tiger and his mistresses were adults having consensual, albeit adultory, sex. What happened between him, his wife, and his mistresses is for divorce lawyers to negotiate. Ben Roethlisberger, judging by the testimony of the three women who have thus come forward, is a rapist. Sexual assault, attempted rape, rape… these are crimes. People who do these things do not belong on Nike billboards, they belong in jail. Tiger is an asshole, but Ben Roethlisberger is a criminal. Let’s note the difference before we go lumping all overpaid, oversexed athletes together. That just wouldn’t be fair.
Dinner with Martha [Vogue]
Doesn’t this just sound like the most lovely way to spend an evening? Martha + André Leon Talley = a match made in heaven. When I was a kid, sick and home from school, I used to love to watch her show, because everything always ends up just right. Let’s note that I would follow that up with a little Bob Ross, so let’s not peg me as too much of a snob.
says Gen. James N. Mattis of the Marine Corps, the Joint Forces commander. According to The New York Times, he’s part of a growing sect of the military that has begun to point out the way the program can over-simplify thinking, and make it easier to ignore creative ways of learning. In an interview, Brig. Gen. H. R. McMaster said, “Some problems in the world are not bullet-izable.”
One of the most famous examples of PowerPoint-related difficulty was the explosion of the Space Shuttle Columbia. It had incurred damage infrastructure that ultimately led to its destruction upon reentry on February 1, 2003, and the death of all seven crew members on board. After analyzing the circumstances surrounding the accident, Edward Tufte believed that PowerPoint slides created by the Boeing Corporation had oversimplified the damage to Columbia during a previous trip, causing individuals involved to miss the possible risks involved in another trip.
Tools are great — I can’t imagine my life without Microsoft Word (largely because my handwriting is atrocious). But I have never taken a class where a PowerPoint has helped a lecture. I have taken several classes where PowerPoint has been used as a crutch by students to get the facts, and just the facts, without the context that exists around them. I’ve noticed myself simply reading off of what is put in front of me and writing it down, instead of listening to what the professor is saying, only to realize later the valuable information I’ve missed. With all tools comes excitement over the time they can save in our lives. I understand the value of the program, but in my experience, linear thinking and learning rarely produce the best work. I’m excited that the military, so often considered to have very specific and traditional ways of structuring their processes, are trying to consider all the options.