Search This Blog

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

skinny chicks rule the world!!!

Downstairs in the family room, the twenty-one year old son, Dave, and his twenty-one year old friend had begun watching "Aeon Flux". I strolled down to join my wife, who stood staring at the screen. Two young skinny actresses (one being Charlize Theron) were flipping and flying towards some kind of cartoon-nightmare of a fortress that was protected by the kind of plants you only saw in acid trips, the kind that shoot to kill.

"At least it's plausible" I deadpanned. My wife and Dave's friend laughed. Dave attempted to ignore me entirely.

Why are so many Hollywood movies about skinny young actress chicks that beat up the world? I mean, of course everyone wants to look at Jessica Alba and Keira Knightley and Jennifer Garner and so on, but how is it so many of them are kicking butt? It doesn't make sense.

Once we had Rambo and Terminator and Chuck Norris to do our wet work for us. Big, strong tough guys are what is needed to beat up the villians and save the world. Yet in recent years we get Supermodel, not Superman.

Maybe I understand it, though. Hollywood is absolutely dominated with liberals. Some of them make your average Democrat look like Bill Frist in comparison. Barbra Streisand? I think they replaced her brain with that of a Parrot that used to belong to George Soros. Che Guevera isn't just on T-Shirts in this crowd, their wives are in a back room trying to channel him. I think Martin Sheen thought he really WAS President for awhile and had a hard time understanding why we were still in Iraq. Cindy Sheehan. Jane Fonda. Susan Sarandon. Who really cares what THEY think?

So even though recounts proved that Bush won in 2000, these guys are in denial. They have been angry and getting more and more unbalanced ever since. Yet there is nothing they can do about it. George Bush is President until 2008 and unless the Democrats find a message and some common sense and step away from the loony fringe it will be another Republican administration in 2009.

Helpless, Hollywood symbolically fights back. The skinny actress is the Liberal Democrat, apparently impotent but (in the eyes of liberals) beautiful. The big bad bullies are the Republicans led by Bush and all those horrid "Flyover Territory" people who don't know what is good for them and keep voting in more Republicans. Personifying the liberal dream, the skinny actress beats up all the baddies and wins the day! Hurrah! Nancy Pelosi for President!!!

Then they all file out of the screening room, make small talk about who has the most incompetent illegal alien gardener and then filter out to their waiting limosines. The "Skinny Chick" movie is released world-wide, males of all ages shell out the cash to stare at Keira's bod and dig the cool effects, and another liberal wet dream has been translated to the screen.

Yes, I think I understand it. While the real life plots of the Democrats keep becoming toe-stubs (Mary McCarthy and the CIA plot to discredit the President comes on the heels of Sandy Berger's destruction of classified documents and the red herring that is Valerie Plame, not to mention the deafening silence they heard from the voters when they cried "Impeach" and when they cried "Illegal Wiretaps"), Charlize Theron is tougher than James Bond and has more deadpan ironic lines than Ahnold.

In my dreams, Nancy Pelosi tries to kick Governor Arnold's butt and hops away holding her broken foot. In my dreams, Harry Reid tries to girl-slap Dick Cheney, Helen Thomas tries to be a journalist and Teddy Kennedy tries to pretend he has any dignity or relevance...or ever did, for that matter.

Ahh, but I have a movie in me. The Third-Terminator. In it, a Soviet-made Cyborg (played by Hilary Clinton) runs for President and wins with her husband Bill Clinton (played by Hugh Hefner) as running mate. She then takes off her fake face, revealing herself to be a cyborg, and runs away to San Francisco (where anything can marry anything) to marry the last female to sleep with Angelina Jolie. Bill Clinton then becomes a third-term President. Hee-Haw reruns are back in at the White House, along with big cee-gars and starry-eyed interns. We withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, begin following the Kyoto agreement and cut off diplomatic relations with Israel and Taiwan. The budget deficit is erased by selling all of our defense technology to China. The 22nd amendment is repealed so the beloved Bill can run again in 2012. The Supreme Court is merged with the World Court.

Preconfigured sequels at two-year intervals:
Let Them Have Iraq, Who Wants It?,
Let Them Have Europe, Who Needs It?, and
Learning To Speak Arabic.

Scary, huh? But I'm not afraid. It can't happen to us because skinny chicks or not, Chuck Norris is still around. Jack Bauer is out there somewhere. Plus, those annoying "Flyover Territory" people still know how to vote. Meanwhile, I guess I have to admit I would rather watch Charlize Theron do front kicks for ninety minutes than watch Sly Stallone blasting baddies with a 50 caliber machine gun. What the heck, I'm a guy...So in the best of both worlds liberals lose and make movies starring Jessica Alba instead of Jean Claude van Damme.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thought-provoking post. Raises many questions.

"Downstairs in the family room, the twenty-one year old son, Dave, and his twenty-one year old friend had begun watching "Aeon Flux "."

Is it as bad as I've heard? The cartoon was . . . ok, through not nearly as good as The Maxx . . .

" Big, strong tough guys are what is needed to beat up the villians and save the world. "
Is that the case?

" Barbra Streisand . . .Martin Sheen . . . Cindy Sheehan. Jane Fonda. Susan Sarandon."

Which one of these is not like the others?

" I think Martin Sheen thought he really WAS President for awhile and had a hard time understanding why we were still in Iraq."
Ha! Why are we still in Iraq again?

"Who really cares what THEY think?"
Who really cares what Radar thinks? Who really cares what Dan S. thinks? Who really cares what anybody thinks?

"So even though recounts proved that Bush won in 2000"

Is that the case? There's no question about it?

"They have been angry and getting more and more unbalanced ever since."
Wasn't it so much nicer during the Clinton years, when the Republicans were models of calm, mature, responsible reasonableness?

"Helpless, Hollywood symbolically fights back."
Could it have something to do with the idea that movies featuring skinny chicks kicking butt pulls in everyone one from drooling guys to girlpowerettes (those sacred target demographics) in a way that neither the remade Pride and Prejudice nor a future Rocky VI can match, leaving studio execs too busy oogling profits to look at poor Ms. Knightley?

" The skinny actress is the Liberal Democrat, apparently impotent but (in the eyes of liberals) beautiful."

Is Buffy really a empowering metaphor for helpless-feeling liberal dems?

" not to mention the deafening silence they heard from the voters when they cried "Impeach" and when they cried "Illegal Wiretaps")"

Was that before or after Bush's approval ratings sank into the 30s and prominent conservatives started distancing themselves? I forget . . .

"In my dreams . . . "
Do you have dreams like this often?

"Harry Reid tries to girl-slap Dick Cheney"
What does it mean that you choose to make fun of an opposing male politician by giving him girlish or feminine attributes? Especially given the context ( a post about butt-kicking young women), what does this say about masculine anxieties in the early 21st century?

"Ahh, but I have a movie in me."
Have you seen a specialist about that?

-Dan S.

creeper said...

Sounds to me like you're reading way too much into this, Radar. Speaking as a heterosexual male, I sure enjoy watching the likes of Jessica Alba, Keira Knightley and Jennifer Garner kicking their way through action scenes, more so than the homoerotically tinged greased-up torsos of Schwarzenegger and Stallone - over them I'll take a beautiful woman or a male action hero with some character and wit (say, Bruce Willis in the Die Hard movies) any day.

"So even though recounts proved that Bush won in 2000, these guys are in denial."

You've got some peculiar interpretations of this word "prove" (as well as "establish"). The most complete count of all the ballots showed that it was inconclusive : some standards favor Bush, some Gore. Ironically, what Gore requested leads to him losing the vote count, whereas IIRC Republicans at the time thought a state-wide recount (not just selecting some counties) would be more fair - and would have led to Gore winning the vote count. Ironies upon ironies...

Bush did win the election, not because of what happened on Election Day, but because of what happened on January 6th, 2001.

radar said...

Creeper,

Wikipedia gives an account that includes some, not all, recount scenarios. It is a good source for definitions but is not authoritative. Keep in mind that the military ballots that were not originally allowed may have been included in a final recount statewide, and those ballots were certainly going to be pro-Bush by a wide margin.

Since hand recounting in all counties was never done, one cannot be sure what went on. But both before and after the official recount, Bush won, this we know for a fact.

In 1960, there is now no doubt that illegal votes helped JFK win the Presidency. A recount in the greater Chicago area would have been very interesting indeed. But it is likely that the declared winner in both 1960 and 2000 proved to be wiser choices than the men they defeated.

A younger Nixon in a showdown with Russia/Cuba may have screwed it all up. Gore in the oval office after the events of 9/11, with his love of the UN, could have been a disaster. In either case, we will never know.

creeper said...

"Wikipedia gives an account that includes some, not all, recount scenarios."

According to your claim that "recounts had proved that Bush won in 2000", there shouldn't be any recount scenarios according to which Gore would have gotten a majority of the votes, certainly not under any scenario favored by Bush supporters.

"It is a good source for definitions but is not authoritative."

I didn't cite Wikipedia as authoritative, but as a succinct presentation of the findings of the NORC, to which the Wikipedia article also linked, if you feel like exploring the issue further.

"Keep in mind that the military ballots that were not originally allowed may have been included in a final recount statewide, and those ballots were certainly going to be pro-Bush by a wide margin."

If you want to get into wishful thinking scenarios, you may as well include the whole butterfly ballot mess. My point is simply that the recounts never 'proved' that Bush got more votes in Florida. That would be impossible because IIRC when the official recounting was stopped, there were still thousands of ballots that hadn't been counted even once. They had been rejected by the machine, but not yet examined by hand. So as far as that goes, the recounts didn't and couldn't prove any such thing as Bush having more votes.

All those ballots were subsequently counted by NORC, and the results are available at their website. It is a very valuable study, because it didn't make impromptu decisions as to whether dimpled chads counted etc., but instead created an inventory of the ballots, so that one can examine potential results based on different standards.

Obviously Bush won, but that is (some may say unfortunately) a somewhat separate issue from the Florida vote count. I'm certainly not a "won't get over it" guy, but I'll gladly correct you when you make erroneous statements.

"Since hand recounting in all counties was never done, one cannot be sure what went on."

Hand recounting of the rejected ballots was done in all counties - that's what the NORC study that Wikipedia links to is all about.

Juggling Mother said...

"" The skinny actress is the Liberal Democrat, apparently impotent but (in the eyes of liberals) beautiful.""

Damn, that statement is a leap of faith;-) I kind of thought the growth of skinny actresses kicking butt is because guys like to watch skinny girls getting sweaty dirty & having their clothes torn, and girls like to imagine they are skinny heroines who still look good while they are sweaty, dirty and wearing torn clothes!

Hollywood mostly likes money, and the bigger fan-base a film can reach, the better. Stallone, Arnie & Van damme types don't really attract teenagers, gays, ladettes or a whole host of other generic groupings. Buffy does. Simple.

If we were talking about reality, neither big strong muscly blokes nor petite but potent girlies are going to save the world. that's up to the great unwashed masses to get off their arses & get involved - either physically or politically.

A Hermit said...

Is this supposed to be some sort of a "liberals are wimps" post?

chuckle, snort...

OK tough guy, if it makes ya feel better to think so...;-)

WomanHonorThyself said...

bravo dude!..aside from the fact that the new genre clearly allows female stars to exploit themselves..flyin round half nekked in tight leather..ure dead right...its soooooo realistic for the anorexic chick to punch out the big huge burly dudes lights..not!..kewl post radar!

A Hermit said...

It's called fantasy guys, just sit back and enjoy it.

Although I have seen a 110lb green belt take down a 250lb black belt who got careless, so it's not impossible. Just really, really unusual...

Jedi Master Rob said...

"Is this supposed to be some sort of a "liberals are wimps" post?"

Yes, I think so. I have no problem with that. Liberals ARE wimps. Next question?

oriolebird38 said...

I never thought I'd ever hear anyone try to convince me that Hollywood makes female ass-kicking films to fufill some liberal agenda. I thought they did it because teenaged boys like seeing Charlize Theron look hot and kick ass, and that teenaged boys attend lots of movies. Just maybe, it's a hare-brained scheme to make money, but that's just my opinion.

I'm not going to deny that Hollywood is liberal because it obviously is. More liberal than I would like them. As a liberal, I wish people like Barbera Streisand and Martin Sheen would can it and stop making me look bad. And I'm not going to sit here and say I don't like seeing Charlize Theron wear tight clothes and kick ass, because that's pretty solid too. Hell, I even liked Alias more than 24. But, it has less to do with my liberal views, and more to do with my pro-hot-women views.

But sense you have them tied in such a way, I think I'll run with it. So when I run for senate, I won't run as a democrat or a republican (cause you know i hate them both). Here it is: Vote Nick Galea for the "Skinny Ass-Kicking Women are Hot" Party in 2020! When I'm in Congress, I promise to push a draft for all models. All models aged 19-24 must be trained in absurd martial arts and then serve a 1 year tour of duty in an exotic location, dispatch enemies in hand-to-hand combat only, and wear a camo bikini.

(Seriously, what straight man WOULDN'T vote for that??)

A Hermit said...

"Liberals ARE wimps. Next question?"

Like I said, you go with that if it makes you feel better.

Just don't ever wear one of those
T-shirts
around me, `cause I'll call you on every one of the lame threats on that list...

Anonymous said...

I know it is an old post but it is never too late to point out you are an idiot.