Rochester Feminist Calls for Unorthodox Rally Monday, Jun 5 2006 

ROCHESTER, NY – Many feminist campaigns urge workplace reforms to allow women to attain upper-level positions in America’s companies. Other groups study gender roles and definitions at the scholarly level. Rochester resident Ashleigh Kelling and founder of the Rochester Area Women’s Dating Rights Association (RAWDRA), advocates feminist reform in the social sphere, citing it as the point where “the rubber meets the road.”

Kelling, despite donning a smart pinstripe jacket, is no stranger to jocularity and maintains that both sexes should do their part in “breaking the ice” in preparation for “hooking up,” terms meaning, respectively, “lightening the mood” and “dating.” According to Kelling, dating is “Easier and more fun for everyone if both parties join in the joking.”

When asked what this had to do with feminism, Kelling replied, “Women have too long been passive recipients of largely uncreative pick-up attempts. Many have accepted that role as normative, when the truth is that women possess the capability to initiate contact and deserve the power to determine their own dating agendas, rather than wait on the whim of some man.”

“It’s an issue of social equality. Women want equality in the workplace, but that equality starts here, in basic social interactions,” Kelling continued, “This is about changing attitudes.”

Critics of Kelling’s position mainly regard it as insignificant. “An empowered woman can easily change a social situation. Institutionalized problems ought to be the focus of serious feminist activity,” said one. Others see Kelling and RAWDRA as counter-productive, attacking Kelling’s approach to empowerment, which entails women paying for dates and buying men gifts equivalent to jewelry such as video game consoles.

Kelling, known as AJ to his friends, responded to these accusations in a recent interview by saying, “Hey, chicks should pitch in too, that’s all I’m saying. I’m not putting out for some girl who only wants me for my wallet. Unless she’s really hot, then maybe.”

He adds, “I hope this message gets out so some ladies show up to the next RAWDRA meeting. I’m sick of just playing beer pong with Mark and Kevin.”

NSA Agent Sighted in Rochester Area Monday, Feb 6 2006 

Today I saw a man in Brighton with a Hitler mustache.

Creepy Robot in Bid to Replace DeLay Monday, Jan 9 2006 

Two top Republicans announced today their bids for the position formerly held by majority leader Tom DeLay. Among them was Majority Whip Roy Blunt (MO). Blunt is a robot programmed with Adept Technologies Near-Human Emotion (NHE) prototype matrix.

The NHE matrix allows the android the ability to nearly replicate three or four human emotions. The result is a certain creepiness Adept spokespeople have referred to as “an inevitable deficiency in robotkind for application in fields such as health care, customer service or pleasure, but a striking advantage in the realm of politics.”

The announcement comes after Rep. Tom DeLay, who was indicted last fall on charges including money laundering, conspiracy, and being from Texas, said that he would not attempt to reclaim his position as majority leader.

Given Issac Asimov’s Three Laws of robotics, Blunt would not be allowed to do anything to harm any humans, a quality many believe makes him a more appropriate candidate.

“We need someone cold and unfeeling in Congress,” said supporter Claudia Macinstry, “Someone without any questionable ties. Someone wihtout friends. I don’t know, I voted for Gore.”

Armed with strong support and a winning smile, Blunt was quoted as saying, “I feel nothing.”

President Bush Uses Spy Network to Find Out Underwear Colors Wednesday, Jan 4 2006 

Amidst accusations that he unlawfully spied on American citizens, recent reports show that President Bush’s intent in spying may have been to uncover the color of underwear Americans wear on a day to day basis.

Our sources show that whle Bush’s spy network was ostensibly meant to discover terrorist activities, the true reason for the infringment upon the rights of citizens may have been more juvenile.

While other unreliable news sources have mistakenly cited the growing power of the executive branch as the cause of the Presiden’ts illicit information trafficking, we at the Basement Window feel it more likely that the President’s nationwide undie-peaking is caused by a continuining spiral into childishness.

New York State Bans Drinking Sunday, Jan 1 2006 

As approximately one million people watched the ball drop in New York City to mark the beginning of 2006, New York State lawmakers met in an emergency session to quietly ban drinking pretty much everywhere. This ban follows a similar law put into effect on 27 March 2003 disallowing smoking in restaurants and bars and restricting it to the outdoors and some living spaces.

Lawmakers cited the numerous parties they were not invited to as sufficient recourse to ban the consumption of alcohol in the few places it was still allowed.

“It was necessary to pass the law when it’s staunchest critics were away getting shitfaced,” spoke one state senator who agreed to comment on condition of anonymity, “We needed to ensure clear-headedness for the deliberations concerning the ban.”

Asked whether or not the senator felt this ban too closely echoed the early national Prohibition amendment, the lawmaker replied, “Alcohol will still be commercially available at local liquor stores and grocers, and people will be allowed to consume it within their own homes where they have the freedom to do anything they like except the things we say they can’t.”

Opponents of the law said today, “Go away, I’ve got a fucking headache.”

Problems Adjusting

Business owners statewide called the ban unfair, citing the destruction of their livelihoods as a direct infringement on their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Jake Warhol, owner of the Choking Fowl Pub in Rochester, NY, made the following statement: “I’ll going to have to close down now. Nobody wants to go to a pub and just sit around. They can’t smoke, they can’t drink, they can’t have fun. If they wanted that, they’d become senators.”

Other business owners voiced their opposition by phoning, e-mailing, and shouting at whichever politician’s name appearred next on the list distributed by the New York State Association for the Appreciation of Alcohol, otherwise known as the NYSAAA.

NYSAAA has been in existence since 1903 when it was called the New York Wine & Spirits Club. It has since promoted the sale and free consumption of alcoholic beverages, and has vowed to fight the new ban.

Marie Hillsen, a spokesperson for the NYSAAA, was quoted at a recent press conference saying, “America must be free, and the American people must be free to drink.”

An Uncertain Future

Citing Prohibition laws and heated discussion, people on both sides of the issue have expressed concern for the future as the ban takes place. Oppenents are pushing for repealing the law while proponents opine the risks of drinking and second-hand drinking from the insides of well-secured buildings.

More moderate thinkers have called for sober judgment from both sides and a reduction of cheap puns.

The drinking ban affects bars, pubs, clubs, restaurants, bowling alleys, hotels, motels, inns, bistros, cafes, and reception halls of all kinds. Within the state legislature buidling, however, senators and lawmakers will still be allowed to carry and drink from their hip flasks.

Homeland Security Notice Hurricanes Thursday, Dec 29 2005 

The destruction caused by hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which ravaged the Gulf Coast earlier this year was verified today in an official announcement by The Department of Homeland Security. After confirming that the hurricanes had no links to Al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced plans to decide on a course of action long after the wake of the devastating storms.

“The American public will hear from us about plans to organize relief, via FEMA, to hurricane-striken areas. First, we’re still trying to teach the guys who color the charts to stay in the lines,” Secretary Chertoff announced. “I think they’re pretty close, and we plan to coordinate the unveiling of our plans with the anniversary of the hurricanes’ landfall.”

The Secretary added that the Department of Homeland Security intends, as always, to provide swift and decisive defense against terrorism everywhere, be it from Islamic fundamentalist groups or random meterological phenomena.

American Idol Rant #42,000 Wednesday, Feb 23 2005 

It’s true, everybody has something to say about that show. I hardly watch it, and this week only because my mom had it on. I could mention a few things about the process which could be improved, what I think of the judges, or comment on what this might indicate about American society (Idol? At least they’re honest). No, I’ll set aside the rambling on the weight that should be given talent versus looks versus charisma. I’ll forego a critique on the narrowness of musical genres recognized as acceptable (I’ve been told a very talented country singer named Josh was hardly allowed to sing any country music). Will I talk about the dehumanization of perfectly talented individuals that takes place when they are nearly reduced to numbers to be voted for? No, I believe my alternate title for this post says it all (barring my following comments). That title is this: Ryan Seacrest should be taken out back and shot.*

Nobody likes Simon Cowell because he’s mean. Nobody likes Randy Jackson because his vocabulary fails to extend beyond “girl” and “dawg” (for their respective genders). Nobody likes Paula Abdul because, wait, hold on. Nobody who remembers the 80′s and 90′s likes Paula Abdul because none of us imagined that pop music (which was already mostly bad in that time period) could really get much worse. Thank you, Paula, for surprising us and delighting us with your insightful comments to the contestants, such as, “I agree with Randy. It just wasn’t you. Not a good song selection,” and, well, that’s it. Everybody has a reason they don’t like certain contestants. I dislike, with the fire of a thousand suns,** the host of the program.

To be fair, he’s probably a puppet; a figurehead for a body of unseen writers, producers, and directors, if you will. I do not care. He is the one on stage, with the microphone. He is the one who will likely never read this lucid and sardonic (not to mention insightful and oh, so witty) analysis of his questionable hosting techniques. But that’s enough being fair — now is the time to make dear Ryan look like a horrible human being.***

Does anyone ever notice his patronizing comments after the judges’ critique? It doesn’t help that he follows the blunt and sometimes (okay, most times) insensitive Simon, but does anyone really need to be treated so contemptuously on national television? Simon may well be insensitive; Ryan is insincere.

Furthermore, just tonight, I watched four contestants lose their places on the show. How did it happen? I realize America voted (not that I particularly trust that method), but is it really necessary to pause in between the words “did” and “not,” as if adding some heightened suspense that the show lacked and ultimately needed? I mean, I realize it’s teenagers, but it doesn’t mean it has to turn into a low-grade Scream rip-off. That movie was horrendous enough, I don’t need some TV host trying to pull those lousy tricks in order to gain some superficial emotional response from the viewers. What’s worse is what happens to the contestants. It’s nerve-wracking to sing in front of a few people. It’s worse if you’re in front of somebody mean. It’s excrutiating on national television. Nobody needs to be tortured like that. What’s next? Some lame-ass words of comfort from Ryan “I got through enough schooling to read the cards and the teleprompter” Seacrest, sing the song that lost you the competition, and get off the stage. None of those contestants need, or deserve, to have that extra stress and humiliation on them.

It doesn’t end there, oh no. Ryan consistently talks the audience through various processes, such as voting using a mobile phone, or knowing when to vote. Thanks, I like to be talked to in such a condescending manner. It makes me warm and spiteful inside. I’ll grant that the bulk of television viewers are about three joints away from being a drooling potato, but do we need to be told before every commercial break (I think there were only seven hundred tonight instead of the regular thousand) that we won’t be able to cast our votes until the end, when “[Ryan] tells us we can.” I think that guy’s on some whacked out power trip. You want a trip, man, smoke some weed. At least you won’t appear as such a jerk.

The conclusion:**** Ryan Seacrest is a horrible human being.***** Unfortunately, the way America works, the appropriate job for him is, well, cheesy reality-television host. I guess we’ll be stuck with him for a while. Me, I’m going to turn off the idiot box and have a beer.

*Read Joseph Heller’s Catch-22 if you truly want to understand this joke. For those of you too lazy to do so, I’m not going to explain it. Suffice it to say, I don’t condone actually taking anybody out back and shooting them.

**That is the technical terminology used for the degree of dislike that is exactly one degree below hating someone, because, as we all know, “hate” is such a strong word. I don’t necessarily think so, but I wanted to write an unrelated and inaccurate footnote. Looks like I win this game. Also, thanks to Heather Potolsky for introducing into my vocabulary the phrase “fire of a thousand suns.”

***The phrase “horrible human being” brought to you courtesy of Brian D’Angelo. Thank you, Brian, for your contribution. I also feel it necessary to mention Brian’s girlfriend Morgan, not because she had any input, but because Brian will mention her if I don’t. He’ll probably mention her anyway. Rock on, Brian and Morgan.

****I learned in high school that you should put some form (or a synonym of) the word “conclusion” in the beginning of your last paragraph. I don’t know if it’s really necessary, but I also went to high school in New York State and passed all my Regents examinations. Don’t lecture me about necessity.

*****Please see footnote ***.

Valentine’s Day Friday, Feb 11 2005 

Next Monday is a special day. It is the day when all of the single people of the world join our hearts and souls together, raise the middle finger, and with one voice, say, “Fuck you, Cupid.”

Do I need to say anything else? No, but I will.

Even were I in a relationship, I would not want to celebrate Valentine’s day. Valentine’s day is not about love. People buy candy and flowers and rings and champagne, go out to dinner, do something “romantic.” If Valentine’s Day were really about love, you would clean the toilet so your significant other doesn’t have to. You would just shut up and admit to being wrong and let go of all the pride that’s been getting between the two of you. You’d forgive each other, for real. That would be Valentine’s Day. Those candy hearts that have stupid sayings on them are like the candy corn of February: everybody has them, and nobody really wants them, and then they’ll go into hiding for another year.

Screw Valentine’s day. Nobody’s taking it seriously anyway, and if they are, it probably means their “love” is weak and non-existent through the rest of the year.

And for all of us single folks, let’s all go have a beer together, because it’s better than drinking by ourselves.

One more time, “Death to Cupid!”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.