For those unaware, it was just the birthday of Dr. Seuss, a writer and illustrator of over three books. Dr. Seuss, also known as Theodor Geisel and The Midnight Luchador, was originally born some time before this article was written. While not actually a doctor in the traditional sense, Seuss did have a firm belief that diseases are bad. Let’s take a look at a few interesting facts:
Notable Works: Hop On Pop 2: Burying The Evidence, The Vagoosle Monologues, The Mystery Of The Whoville Strangler
Book You May Not Know About: His little known erotica novel “Dr. Seuss Loves A Nice Caboose”.
Interesting Fact: Whenever anybody asked “is anyone here a doctor?” he would giggle uncontrollably, ignoring the emergency at hand.
Biggest Regret: Not living long enough to see more episodes of Home Improvement.
Notable Quote: “I’m going to say it one more time. The Cat In The Hat was not hiding a list of Communist Party members under his hat. I’m not going to address this ever again.”
CC Photo By Al Ravenna, New York World-Telegram and the Sun staff photographer – Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division. New York World-Telegram and the Sun Newspaper Photograph Collection. http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3c16956, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1385486
The confetti has dropped, the statues are given out, and Leonardo Decaprio can finally use the trophy case he built twenty years ago.
However, joy was not felt throughout on Oscar Sunday. Partway through the evening, in a particularly rare instance, social media was a hotbed of outrage. As the In Memoriam reel rolled, many online socialites saw something they thought may be a problem that possibly should be commented on.
Immediately, social media areas such as Facebook, Twitter, and Overstock.com message boards were addressing the complete lack of diversity in the memorial section of the event.
“Wow. Can’t believe the total lack of variety in this section”, a blogger commented. “Didn’t the Oscars make sure some people of color passed away this year? Shameful.”
President of the Academy Awards Cheryl Boone addressed these issues immediately.
“We want to make sure that our Hollywood mortuaries aren’t simply relegated to one type of person. However, we can work to change this by the next awards ceremony. It’s our duty to make sure more diverse people pass away within the next year.”
With the hastag #GraveyardsSoWhite trending immediately, it looks like social change will be the talk of Hollywood for another hour or so.
For those not in the know, barely in the know, or simply stuck in a bubble of blissful ignorance, today is the official 20th anniversary of the Pokemon franchise. To celebrate, let’s take an in-depth look at the history of the franchise.
Backmasking is a tool widely used by musicians to put a hidden message into their songs. For example, the Beatles famously put words such as “Paul Is Dead” and “Ringo ate all the bagels” into their songs utilizing backmasking. However, sometimes the example is a bit more modern and sometimes the message is just a bit darker.
In 1982, Cher’s long list of hit singles just continued to grow. Her latest single at the time, “Rudy”, was possibly written about that guy from that movie. But I’m not sure. All I do know is that the song was a big hit. A big hit with a hidden secret.
Like the Beatles and probably other bands before them, Cher decided to use the song to insert a controversial message. If you play the song backwards, at around the two-minute mark, you can distinctly hear her saying “ISIS is Nice-is.”
At least, that’s what somebody from work told me. I don’t have a copy of the song and am not totally sure how to play anything backwards, but I believe the person that told me. They’re the same person that broke the story on Wesley Snipes going bankrupt after all.
All I can say is shame on Cher. Why would she go out of her way just to implant such an insensitive and disturbing message into her music? Well, here’s one blogger who won’t contribute to her agenda anymore.
CC Photo Courtesy Of Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5676013
Time has allowed us to figure out the validity of our established laws more thoroughly. Sometimes a law stands the test of time, other times we realize too late that a law needs to be abolished. For example, did you know you could legally kill a man in Massachusetts as long as it was during a mattress sale? Luckily, we mostly repeal these laws before it’s too late.
Other times we, as Americans, aren’t so lucky.
The “Two For Flinching” Act, made by lawmakers in Colonial times, has gone on too long. The law was originally created when historical lawmaker Biff Abraham mimed punching his sister. When his sister flinched at the pretend punch, Biff had an inspired idea. A law to punish those who prematurely avoided a predetermined punch. He would immediately draft means to make his concept official law.
His sister, on the other hand, was tried as a witch and burnt at the stake.
While the law was all well and good for whenever Colonial Times were, this is the here and now. It’s time to make the changes as a society we need.
America is a country of change. We changed the original Statue Of Liberty because it only had four fingers. We changed the Bill Of Rights to follow an aa bb rhyme scheme. We gave Abraham Lincoln a hat to cover his perm.
It’s time we made a change. If not, what seperates us from the people that probably didn’t even have flashlights?
It’s been said that we live in a very evolved world. We are much more aware of things now that we weren’t decades ago. We understand that everyone is different, and that we should celebrate those differences.
But what about bald people?
The follically challenged have been notably discriminated for years. It’s no secret that the public has a distaste for the bald. Case and point: have we ever had a bald President? I’m not sure.
We’ve relegated the bald to the background of society, forcing them to wear caps to conceal their differences. We advertise wigs, plugs, and bundles of animal fur to our bald bretheren so we can avoid the glare from the back of their heads. Should we feel bad about that?
I’m not sure.
It’s really difficult to say, as a society, whether we should treat bald people any differently than us normals. We don’t want them to feel bad because they’re different, we want them to feel bad for other reasons.
I can’t say for sure whether or not we should treat the bald equal to the rest of us. And, really, it’s not my place to judge whether we should continue devaluing them.
All I know is the answer is out there somewhere.
Only time will tell how society’s view of the bald develops.