This Is Not A Good Idea

Those beauty pageants for small children? Yeah, the ones where there are little girls dressed up like pole dancers and/or whores. What's that? Oh. Right. They're not not pole dancers and/or whores. They're future pole dancers and/or whores. My mistake. But from what I can figure out, the only people who actually think that this is an OK thing to put your daughter through are the pageant moms. They seem to think it's just fine while the majority of the rest of the world finds it all completely abhorrent. I don't quite get that. I mean, if everyone hates it, why does it still exist? (While the rational answer might appear to be that everyone doesn't hate it, I refuse to accept that reason. The thought that people are OK with this depresses me.) I guess I digress. If you're still undecided on the matter, check out the little video below. This is what can happen when you put your kid in pageants. Why do I have a horrible feeling that this kid is going to have her own reality show someday?

Alana, Age 6, Best Beauty Pageant Kid, Ever - Watch More Funny Videos

moreless

Worst Idea Ever

I'm pretty sure that I have just run across the stupidest idea I have ever heard. Pretty sure. There are a lot of morons out there who think that they have great ideas and all, but I think that this one might be a winner. I don't know. You tell me. What do you think about the idea of drilling some holes in the floor of your house so that you can stick your legs through them and sit on the floor as you pretend that it's a freaking chair? Wait. What now?

Correct. From something called the Mother Nature Network, we learn that a one completely clueless Martina Decker and one equally clueless Peter Yeadon (of something called Decker Yeadon), who seem really concerned with the idea that there is a lot of energy and waste that comes along with the home furnishing business. Granted, there is a lot of energy and waste that comes along with probably just about every business, but they're not discussing that. No, if they did that, it would make their highlighting of those issues seem silly. Well, sillier.

They're presenting this idea as a "zero-material seating alternative." Now, I would have thought that just sitting on the freaking floor would have been a "zero-material seating alternative", but how much press would that have gotten? None, that is correct. Here's how this works: The concept is called an OOoo Chair. What it requires is that the “owner” "...drill two circular, leg-sized holes in a floor and then line ‘em with recyclable plastic disks. Ready to sit? Remove the disks and stick your legs in the holes." Oh, for cryin' out loud. WHAT?!

Seriously, how can one justify such a completely ridiculous concept? Drilling holes in the floor to put your legs in?! What's the point of this again? If you're asking the 'designers', they'll explain that "OOoo Chair is an innovate design solution that attempts to address the energy and waste problems that are propelled by furniture production and disposal. The project intends to provoke a change in our behavior, and in our way of thinking about our furniture. The chair concept is almost as simple as sitting on the floor." Um, it IS sitting on the floor, you imbeciles!

Do they not think that drilling the holes will take energy? Do they not think that the production of the disks is going to take energy? Do they not think that not everyone wants to have two holes in their floor? And what is it that they want? To provoke a change in our behavior? It's provoked a change in MY behavior. I now want to punch 'designers'. I also want to build the wall around my walled off compound about three feet higher to keep me away from morons like these folks. Sit in a freaking chair! It's not going to kill anyone!

moreless

Say "Happy Birthday" With Flavor!

In what might be one of the most ridiculous product roll outs since Smell-O-Vision, the folks over there at American Greetings (you know, the card company that is not Hallmark) have announced via PR News Wire, their new line of cards called Tasties. That's right. It's a greeting card that you can taste. Wait. What now?

Correct. According to a one Mary McClain, who is the creative director of new product concepts over there at American Greetings, "Just think, haven't you ever secretly wished you could actually taste that delicious looking piece of cake on the front of your birthday card? Well, now you can literally have your cake and eat it, too." Um, well...wait. How many birthday cards have pictures of cake on the front of them? I know that there are probably SOME, but certainly not all of them. And the ones that do, I'm not recalling them looking all that scrumptious. Cartoonish, if anything, would be how I'd describe them. But really, I'm not ever thinking that I wished I could taste the cake on my card because, if I'm receiving the card for my birthday, I know that there actually is a real cake right around the corner! That's what you do on birthdays! You eat cake!

The press release goes on to read that "Each card in the new line features a deliciously dissolvable flavor-strip, safely sealed inside, which recipients can enjoy along with the warm wishes of friends and family." Clearly, the folks over at American Greetings have never met my friends and family. We're not exactly the "warm wishes" type of folks. Good Lord, especially not my friends. We're more of a "Happy birthday, bee-yotch!" sort of crowd.

And I don't know that I'm finding a lot of appeal in the though of a "deliciously dissolvable flavor-strip" that I'm supposed to eat. And of course, with all of those damn well-wishers sitting around you, you wouldn't have any choice but to eat the thing! And probably to chants of "Eat! Eat! Eat! Eat!" Good Lord, it sounds like a bad idea all the way around.

Here's an example of what you can expect: " One birthday card in the new line features a mouth-watering image of a cupcake and reads, "If nothing else, birthdays are a great excuse to eat cake." The inside reads, "…lots and lots of cake." The dissolvable strip included encourages recipients to "take a bite," and enjoy the taste of vanilla cupcake, expanding on the fun and sweetness of the greeting. Other flavors to help consumers celebrate include everything from donut to margarita." Eww. Eating a dissolving strip is not like eating "lots and lots of cake". I don't care how good the strip tastes, it's still not cake. It just doesn't sound like all that great of an idea to me. Yeah, so, eww.

What, exactly, does "everything from donut to margarita" include? Because if we're going alphabetically, that doesn't include cake! It also wouldn't include alcohol or tequila. There'd be no pie. No chocolate. No sprinkles. Oh, frosting! There'd be frosting! Again, I'm back to eww. And really, I've never tried to connect the dots from a donut to a margarita. Is it like a 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon sort of thing? Like 6 Degrees of Really Dumb Ideas?

This won't last long at all. The card companies aren't willing to admit it, but we're not all that fond of those musical cards that they insist on shoving upon us either. Those should have gone wayside a long time ago. But I think that it will be pretty evident rather quickly that this was a silly idea (and I use the term "silly" quite loosely, as this is completely idiotic).

moreless

Worst Bridal Idea Ever

There are plenty of moronic ideas out there that I have never understood and likely never will. The pet rock. Head-On. (Come on, isn't that just Chap-Stick?) Spray-on hair. Geometry. But there are some things out there that are so absolutely, completely inexplicable (totally without splick) that it makes me wonder about mankind and how much longer it can sustain itself. If this product is any indication, I'm guessing about another 24 hours. Tops.

According to something called Marie Claire, there is a rather disturbing accessory that a bride can opt for on her wedding day. I say "rather disturbing" in the most offensive way that I can without flipping out over this. Don't get me wrong; it's not like I'm suddenly going to become objective or anything. But I do realize that sometimes it's hard for people to look past "Holy crap, can you believe this s---?!" So I went with "rather disturbing". You tell me what adjectives you would have used if someone suggested to you that a bride, in order to avoid having to spend a ton of time taking off her wedding apparel in the event of having to use the restroom, should wear a diaper? Wait. Wuck?

Correct. According to the Marie Claire article, there is actually a bridal diaper product. The purpose of said bridal diaper is what I alluded to above. In order to not have to completely disrobe should nature call on your wedding day, someone thinks that the reasonable solution is to wear a diaper and just piss yourself on your wedding day instead. Sure. That makes perfect sense. I can see why this is a thing.

The article states "After a quick Google search I found out that it’s not a joke. Some bridal shops do in fact sell bridal diapers." Holy canoli, are you dry shaving me? Apparently, they are not. (But even if they were, I'd imagine that it would be more pleasant than wearing a diaper underneath a wedding gown on one's wedding day.)

Now, that article found its way over to the folks at The Frisky and they, too, did some research. It doesn't make this story any less icky, though. They found out that "...in general, most brides who do this use regular ol’ adult diapers, but then put, like, frilly or satin diaper covers over them, like panties." Yeah, OK. Um, still wrong! Covered in frills or satin, it's still wrong.

The Frisky folks found that "A Google image search revealed a photo of this bride’s bottom, which sure looks like it has some excess cotton padding going on." Behold!

Yeah, OK. Um, that's just weird. I'm also going to agree with the Frisky folks when they say that they wouldn't exactly call this a trend. I wouldn't either. It's definitely not a trend. And I'm also going to agree with their saying that if even ONE person is doing this, that is disturbing. What better way to spend your wedding day! Standing around in your own filth! Sounds lovely! And romantic, too!

Don't do this. Don't ever do this. Don't even think of doing this. Buy some Head-On (which I think that we all can tell is a complete rip-off!) before you consider wearing an adult diaper underneath your wedding dress! Do anything before you consider wearing an adult diaper underneath your wedding dress! And by "anything", I mean get yourself some therapy is this was on your list of considerations. The saying doesn't go "Something old. Something new. Something borrowed. And some poo." That's not how it goes at all.

moreless

One Of The Worst Ideas Ever

Some things are just inexplicable to me. I mean, I can understand how one person can screw something up. That's easy enough. It's only one person. One person might not see right away that something is a horrible idea. But it's when something is an absolutely horrible idea and there is more than one individual involved in the decision making process that it just really confuses me. How is it that more than one person can think that something is a good idea when it so clearly is not?

Here's the scoop: Over at the AP we learn about a practice that went on at the Lower Merion School District in Philadelphia. See, they issued laptops to their students. (There's a high school that issues laptops to students? That alone was news to me. Don't get me wrong. I think it's a fine idea. I was just a little surprised by it is all.) But in the past couple of years, about 80 of the laptops had gone missing. It's unclear exactly how many laptops were issued to begin with, but what is clear is that they couldn't find 80 of them and they needed to figure out where they were. But that's OK because the computers all had a tracking program in them that was activated and the webcams in the laptops took over 56,000 pictures. Wait. What now?

Correct. In some desperate attempt to locate these 80 missing laptops, this tracking program was activated. When activated, wherever the laptops were, as long as they were on I'm assuming, they would take a picture once every fifteen minutes. Now, where are the laptops going to be the majority of the time? I'm guessing that they're going to be where the kids spend most of their time. Like in their house. In their rooms. Places where there really shouldn't be secret tracking programs taking pictures of them, I'm guessing!

Seriously, how many people had to have been aware that this was a program and a procedure that were going to be implemented with the intention of being used at some point? Clearly, there had to have been several people involved in this process. In fact, the AP article said that there were TEN people who were authorized to request that the programs be activated. TEN?! How did they all think that this was a good idea? I mean, one person can come up with the idea. I get that. But do you mean to tell me that NO ONE else ever said anything like, "Uh, I don't know if we can even legally do that."? Really?! That would probably be the first thing that I would think. OK, it'd be second. It'd be the second thing right after "Oh, hell no!"

And that's the part I don't get. It's such an unbelievably bad idea. That seems obvious. But yet, somehow, some way, it got done. Who are these people? Who thought that this was going to be OK? All at least of them? The school district is claiming that none of the photos taken were inappropriate, meaning that no one was fully undressed in any of the photos. But if you're asking me, just taking the photos at all is inappropriate, so it's really hard to define that to mean something that is really pretty much after the fact. We're just surrounded by stupidity, that's all there is to it. But it still scares the hell out of me.

moreless

A Famine Is Not A Shortage

I'm always amazed at how very, very few good commercials there are out there. It's not that hard to capture the interest of the viewing public. All you really need is some sort of talking animal and we're hooked. Any variation from that theme and you're really playing with fire. But some commercials are just so absolutely ridiculous that I find it amazing that anyone ever thought that they were a good idea in the first place.

My case in point here today is a Denny's advertisement which I, sadly, have yet to view. It has apparently disappeared from the airwaves and it has disappeared from online. (I didn't know it was possible to make something completely disappear online. Is it only things that aren't naked that can completely disappear?) But the fine folks over there at Asylum were kind enough to fill us in on the details of not only a commercial, but also a promotion that I find simply inexplicable.

Apparently, the often roadside and frequent neighbor of La Quinta restaurant chain "...was offering unlimited pancakes and fries". Really?? I am a big fan of pancakes and an even bigger fan of fries. And what am I really a fan of? Both of those things in an unlimited quantity, that is correct. But why would they be offering such a remarkable feast? Why, "...to mark the 150th anniversary of Ireland's potato famine." Oh. Awkward.

Wait a minute. Didn't, um, like...oh....a million or so folks die from the potato famine? Yep, I think they did. And Denny's felt the need to commemorate this with unlimited food?! That seems ill advised at best. (By the way, what do pancakes have to do with it? Potato pancakes? I mean, the whole idea is not good to begin with, so maybe that's why I don't get why pancakes are included. The whole thing doesn't make sense, so they might as well throw the pancakes in, I guess. I'm pretty sure there was never a Pancake Famine.)

Were the folks in the advertising department unclear as to the meaning of the word "famine"? I'm thinking they got it confused with the word "shortage". There was a potato shortage in Ireland in 1849, 1850, somewhere around there. But it's not like the shortage didn't have consequences. Hence the term famine! WHO thought this was a good promotion? (And how in the world did they remove all instances of that ad from the freaking Internet?! That might be the real story here!)

Of course, a Facebook page protesting this and claiming that Denny's hates the Irish has popped up. (I'm not including a link to it because the wall of said page seems to be full of idiots commenting and isn't really worth a link from here. There is a link to it on the Asylum page that I linked to above if you need a good dose of idiots ranting about nothing.) For God's sake, can nothing happen in this world any more without a freaking Facebook page being created by some mouth breathing paste eater who thinks that they're making a difference by doing so? The page currently has 1,860 members. There are approximately 36,000,000 Americans with Irish heritage in this country of about 350,000,000. There's not exactly a national uproar about this is my point.

Do I think Denny's hates the Irish? Um, no. I don't. Do I think that anyone at Denny's in their advertising department should lose their job over this? Um, no. I don't. It was a rather ridiculous idea, I'll give it that. But the thing is, it's not like just one person is responsible for this inane-ness. I'm guessing that there were at least several people involved in the creating and filming and approving of this ad. Several. How is it that not ONE of those folks saw this and said, "Um, say...you know, I think a lot of people died during that little tater problem they had over there. I don't know if we should be offering free french fries to mark the anniversary of a bunch of people starving to death. And by the way, what in the world do pancakes have to do with it?" Why did no one think that? How many people thought this was a good idea and why?

According to The Irish Echo Online, one of their readers who saw the ad (and inexplicably felt the need to write, not to Denny's, but to The Irish Echo Online) wrote, "What's next, free latkes for the holocaust?" Ohhh. Dark. But point well made. Seriously. What's next, Denny's? Got anything to commemorate the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation? I'm going to let you insert your own joke here (I'm a little bit afraid to do it myself, as I get enough wacky email as it is) as you think about how well that would go over.

In summation, I'm pretty sure that Denny's does not hate the Irish. (And if they did, I'm really sure that they wouldn't go around advertising it.) They probably need to be a tad more discerning about the talent that they hire in the advertising department. (Perhaps a history major for consulting purposes. Lord knows they can use the work.) But other than that, they're just Denny's. That pretty much sums it up. Oh, but if you know where this ad can be viewed online, please let me know. I'm dying to see it. And more importantly, if you know how to completely and entirely remove something from the Internet, let me know! I find that aspect absolutely fascinating.

moreless

Every Monkey Was Kung-Fu Fighting

One of my biggest pet peeves? That's right. Animals dressed as humans. See, animals don't need clothes. They're animals. They have fur. Again, they don't need clothes. Another one of my pet peeves is right along that same line and that would be animals being taught to do things that they're not supposed to do. You know, like in those Russian circuses where they routinely have bears riding bicycles or playing ice hockey. Or even in American circuses where they have elephants walking a tightrope or seals setting zebras on fire or something like that. (I haven't been to a circus in a while, so they might not still be like that. Some things may have changed.) But it's when the animal finally, finally gets sick of being forced to skate around on ice and (assumedly) feeling like an idiot and they attack the moronic human beings who were making them do these obviously unnatural animals acts, for some reason, people are surprised. They're either surprised or the whole story is deemed incredibly newsworthy but in an odd sort of way. When these sort of animals attack, it's always reported in that serious tone of voice as if something horrible has happened. I'm not so sure that it has. And I certainly don't understand why there isn't more of a "of course this happened" tone to the reporting of such incidents.

Tell me something. If you hear that some guy has been teaching monkeys to do karate, how do you think that story is going to turn out one day? Not well, I'm guessing. Not well at all! Tell me when was the last time that you thought that a monkey who knew how to do karate would be a good idea. I'm guessing never. I know that I never have. But clearly, I think differently than a one 42-year old Lo Wung.

According to those fine folks across the pond at The Telegraph, Mr. Wung "...taught the monkeys (taekwando) so they could entertain crowds outside a shopping centre" in China. Um, so they could entertain crowds doing what exactly? Wouldn't they need someone to do the taekwando ON?

Listen, a beast, an ape, a primate, whatever you want to call the thing, it has the strength of at least ten men, probably more like twenty. A thirty pound primate can kick the ass of a 200-pound man ten times out of ten on any given day. Any zoologist (or Planet of the Apes fan) will tell you that. And you're going to teach those sort of creatures how to do martial arts? What is wrong with you, sir?

Now, I don't know exactly what sort of methods are used by an amateur Chinese taekwondo monkey trainer, but I'm guessing it doesn't involve lots of pats on the head and little treats. It's just a guess. By the way, if you're still not sure how this story is going to turn out, what if I told you that the trainer tripped and fell amidst his monkeys that he had trained how to do karate? Then would you be a little more clear on which direction this thing was headed?

The guy fell and the monkeys finally saw the opportunity that they had apparently been waiting for. They knew that this taekwondo crap that they were being taught would come in handy for something and they had a hunch it wasn't just for entertaining those crowds at the mall. But when this guy did a face plant, that's when they knew. And that's when they didn't "go crazy", that's when they "went monkey" on the guy. Only they didn't just "go regular monkey" on the guy. They went "karate knowing monkey" on the guy. Ouchie.

I would like to extend my utmost thanks to one of the bystanders who has provided us with his hilarious account of what transpired after the unfortunate tripping of the trainer. According to a one Hu Luang, "I saw one punch him in the eye - he grabbed another by the ear and it responded by grabbing his nose. They were leaping and jumping all over the place. It was better than a Bruce Lee film." It sounds better than a Bruce Lee film. (Then again, almost anything is better than a Bruce Lee film if you're asking me.)

The guy then made the ill-advised move of grabbing a stick which he was going to use to control his revengeful monkeys. The monkeys knew what that stick was for and they weren't having any of it. They took the stick away from their trainer and used it for what it was for. A beat down. That stick-brandishing monkey who had been trained in taekwondo (there's a sentence I never thought I'd type) clocked the guy over the head with it. (It's at this point that I'm really hoping that people were cheering on the monkeys. Given the account by Mr. Luang (I'm assuming it's a "mister". With a name like Hu Luang, I really cannot tell.), I'm really picturing that they were doing just that. Perhaps gathered in a circle, loudly chanting "Mon! KEY! Mon! KEY! Mon! KEY!")

Sadly, this doesn't end with the guy getting his face ripped off. No, instead the guy managed to tangle the primates up in a rope that he had been using to keep them from running off. Huh. If I had to choose between my monkey using martial arts on me and pummeling me into a bloody pulp (in public none the less) or having them run off, I'm thinking I'd be for choosing the running off. But not this guy. He got those monkeys all roped up and under control and when he did "...he made the monkeys kneel on the ground with their hands tied behind their backs to punish them and make them show remorse for their nasty attack." Yeah, that'll make it so this doesn't happen again. Sure.

They're animals, for cryin' out loud! They have their own methods and techniques of protecting themselves. They don't need to be spinning around in the air like that Bruce Lee guy. Bruce Lee wasn't a monkey! I swear he wasn't! I've heard that Kung Fu Fighting song many times in my life and it doesn't mention anything about monkeys! So why would you train monkeys (monkeys who are already stronger than you without the martial arts, by the way) to do taekwondo? I don't get it.

What say next time you teach them something a little more exciting. I know! Teach them how to drive a car! Or to really kick things up a notch, how about a bus?! Maybe teach them how to drive a tractor and have them work a farm! Wait! I've got it! Firearms! Teach the monkeys how to use a gun! That will end well, won't it? Um, no. No, it won't. It will end poorly....why? Because they're MONKEYS. They don't get to be like humans, they get to be like monkeys. No karate. No tractors. No guns. For the love of God, no guns.

moreless