With the recent sex scandals involving Democrats and Republicans, it seems everyone is speaking out and condemning the actions. But there’s one group that hasn’t said anything so far, and that group is feminists.
In fact, we haven’t heard much from feminists in recent years, mainly because not too many people care about feminists these days. And that’s including their alleged allies on the Left. In order to strike while the iron is hot, I want to help feminists regain their former glory, provided you want to hear from a man. Well, if that’s the case…I’m still gonna talk about it.
First we need to talk about the elephant in the room, and I’m not talking about Rosie O’Donnell. You guys…I mean gals…I mean women…I mean womyn have more issues than the New York Times Magazine, and it’s these issues that are preventing you from being considered anything other than the proto-Karens you became. And before you start in with the “that’s offensive” crap, this is part of the problem: nobody likes you!
And because nobody likes you, you have a hard time working and playing with other kids. Before you say it, it’s not the patriarchy; it’s you. You come off as rather abrasive to people who aren’t like you, maybe because…well, you are. Unless they kiss your butts (consensually of course) in the name of free abortions, you treat them like utter scum.
Which brings me to another issue you have: you don’t have a consistent message, and the women who were heading up the movement before you disappeared like Nick Fuentes in Harlem were the ones driving it. On the one hand, you claimed all you wanted was to be on equal footing with men, which I honestly don’t have a problem with. But some in your group didn’t get the memo and really want women to be more powerful than men.
Guess who have been the loudest voices in the feminist movement? That’s right, the proto-Karens! You know, the people we don’t like?
That has to change to change the perception of feminism today. Much like with the gay rights movement, the general public gets freaked out when the loudest people representing a movement are the absolute freaks and there are no voices to counter them. This may cause a less acrimonious split than Ike and Tina Turner, but to regain mainstream credibility you have to be willing to tell the loud freaks to shut up and let the adults talk.
Along with this, you also need to come to terms with a biological truth: men can’t be women. Although this isn’t controversial to anyone with even a slight knowledge of reality, this has become the norm with the Left. There are a few feminists out there who are brave enough to acknowledge men and women are different, the silence feminists have allowed to continue on this subject tells me (and a lot of other people) you agree. That has to stop, too, for the same reason as above.
The reason for these moves is the same: to normalize feminism to the point is becomes acceptable to the masses. Civil rights didn’t move forward until people learned to get over their biases and accept blacks as equals. Feminism is on the cusp of that, but the way to break on through to the other side is to reject the rantings of your more radical brethren…err sisteren and clearly state what feminism is.
And given how quiet some of you ladies have been, that’s going to take some doing.
The good thing is you have the opportunity to do that doing right now. Both major parties have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar (and by that I mean unwilling victims’ pants). Not to mention, actual women are being pushed aside in favor of men dressing up like women. Seriously, do you want to be replaced by Dylan Mulvaney, someone who is a living mockery to the class of Audrey Hepburn?
This is a giant neon sign with an arrow pointing at a door that reads “This is your chance to come back.” This is going to be a big ask, but if you want to be relevant again, you have to at least consider it.
You’re gonna have to align yourself with women you used to hate.
Over the past few years, women like Riley Gaines has done more to advance women’s rights than your ideological allies on the Left. Ditto with J. K. Rowling, Tammy Bruce, and Christina Hoff Sommers, to name a few. And I know the Left has a problem with TERFs (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists for those of you playing along at home), but right now they’re the ones doing the heavy lifting and taking the slings and arrows of outrageous Leftist hate.
Maybe it’s time you reevaluate who is really on your side. Spoiler Alert: it ain’t the Left anymore. They may have been on your side a couple of decades ago, but now they’re less reliable than Lindsey Lohan as your rehab accountability buddy. They have used you for votes and donations, and all you have to show for it is those weird looking pink hats you wore during the first Trump Presidency.
In other words, the Left has become your ex.
And you definitely need to cut ties and find someone new who will treat you better. I’m not saying that’s the Republican Party necessarily, but given your recent past, you can do a lot worse because you have.
This is only the beginning, but it’s going to have to do for now. Take these steps and you will be on your way to becoming relevant again. Now, go out and make history!
And don’t worry. I can make my own sammiches!
Tag: extremist makeover
Extremist Makeover – No Kings Edition
In case you missed it (and if you’re like me, it’s because you had stuff to do), the latest round of No Kings protests happened recently, and in spite of the semi-impressive numbers (1 out of 50 Americans allegedly attended), it still hasn’t caught on with the general population.
That’s where I come in!
Since redressing grievances with the federal government is protected by the First Amendment and since this little writing gig of mine is dependent upon a healthy First Amendment, I have a soft spot for the No Kings protests. And, no, it’s not my head, so you can stop asking. As easy as it would be to sit back and mock them (not that I’m going to stop, mind you), I want to help make No Kings more viable.
The first thing that jumps out at me is the the messaging. You’re protesting people you think are acting like kings in a country that defied a king and has never had one since. And your allies across the pond in England? They actually have a king, so they had to switch the message to No Tyrants as to not offend the Royal Family. After all, they command the military. Not exactly a good outcome.
With this decided difference of message, it’s difficult to have one voice. Further complicating matters is the duplicity of the message itself. The same people coming out against the Trump Administration acting like a king or dictator are the ones who said “Rule me harder, Daddy” under the Biden Administration during COVID. So, you’re not really No Kings so much as No Kings We Don’t Agree With.
Yeah, so there’s a pretty big issue there, but one that isn’t impossible to resolve with a little creativity. No Kings We Don’t Agree With is a little wordy for a bumper sticker, so we need to come up with something shorter and catchier, something that gets the point across consistently. Something like…oh, I don’t know…the Anti National Tyranny Initiative, or ANTI. Just think of it! You can have ANTI t-shirts, ANTI bumper stickers, ANTI coffee mugs, ANTI water bottles, and so on! If you can think it, you can ANTI it!
In fact, you can lead a whole ANTI life if you put your minds to it! Be ANTI everything if you’d like! In fact, you could even have a spokesperson you could call Auntie ANTI! And when someone asks you what you believe in, you can just say “We’re ANTI.”
Just rolls off the tongue, doesn’t it?
We have the slogan and marketing point down, and even a lot of the messaging taken care of, so now we need to make it more popular. Visibility isn’t an issue because you have wall-to-wall media coverage (at least until Trump leaves office and a Democrat gets into power at some point). In order to attract more people, the most logical step is to stop being so exclusionary.
The Left has a litmus test problem, namely the fact they have a litmus test in the first place. Anyone who wants to play in their reindeer games has to go through a litany of loyalty tests before they’re officially considered one of the clan. Then, if they deviate even one micron from the hivemind, no matter how much sense it makes to do so, they get excommunicated and turned into a pariah.
And that’s how you guys got President Donald Trump. Twice.
There are plenty of people not exactly enamored with Trump or MAGA (including your humble correspondent), but the way you treat us doesn’t exactly make us want to join you. There’s an old saying, “You attract more flies with honey than with vinegar,” but you’re not even putting out the vinegar. Instead, you’ve gone right to the sulfuric acid and then wondering why no one’s enjoying what you have to offer. You have to temper the rhetoric so it becomes more universal in nature. Your movement won’t grow if you keep preaching to the same people over and over again. The echo is nice, but it’s prohibitive to growth.
“But we got 1 out of every 50 people!” you say. Yeah. That’s a whopping 2% of the population. By comparison, in the 2024 election, over 73% of the voting-age population actually voted. Although the popular vote was closer than 2%, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the 2% you’re getting at your marches is already on your side, so it’s not going to swing that many elections.
You need new blood, not old people traveling from protest to protest on a bus.
Another issue you have is transparency. You’re already seen as more fake than Joe Biden’s hair, and your lack of honesty when it comes to your funding and organization isn’t helping. You have two options: own it, or divest yourselves of it. Since you’re not likely to do the latter, just come out and admit “Yeah, we’re as grassroots as Astroturf.” Then, list who is funding your protests and let the chips fall where they may. If you’re a puppet for our good friend Uncle George Soros, say it with your whole chest, and the same goes for any other Leftist organization who funnels money to these protests. It will cost you some potential members, but the honesty might gain you more respect than you have now.
And right now, No Kings is getting its butt kicked by used car salesmen in the popularity arena. On the plus side, you’re still leagues ahead of Congress.
Finally, you need to stop being so hypocritical when it comes to fighting the tyranny you see. Not only do you look foolish when you call one side tyrannical while staying silent when your side does the same stuff. If you really are against people acting like kings and tyrants, it has to be all or nothing. Start looking at the COVID restrictions under Biden and Democrat governors. If you don’t see tyranny, you shouldn’t be protesting because it’s clear you don’t know what it is. Once you have that down, call it all out, Democrat and Republican, liberal and conservative, The Captain and Tennille.
I do have a few other suggestions, but this should get you started. Good luck in turning the No Kings experiment into an ANTI experience!
_____________________________________________
Follow this blog on Mastodon or the Fediverse to receive updates directly in your feed.
Something About Everything
a Blog about Faith, Politics, Technology, and everything.
536 posts
2 followers
Fediverse Followers
Extremist Makeover – Presidents’ Day Edition
Depending on when you read this, America is either celebrating or just celebrated Presidents’ Day, a federal holiday that is the equivalent of a participation trophy for people we’ve smartly or foolishly allowed access to the nuclear codes. And to be fair I can go either way on that one.
While most Americans outside of furniture stores and car lots don’t celebrate Presidents’ Day with the same zeal as, say, Arbor Day, I think this is a situation where a little makeover might change the perception, if not the one-day-only sale prices at the aforementioned vendors. All it takes is some outside-the-box thinking, and I’m as far outside the box as you can get without being declared legally insane.
And to be fair, I can go either way on that, too.
Let’s deal with the elephant and the donkey in the room. Not all Presidents are created equal. While we celebrate the courage and accomplishments of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Ronald Reagan, Presidents’ Day includes a lot of also-rans who are only remembered by history buffs and kids trying to pass an 8th grade history class. People like Millard Filmore, Iowa’s own Calvin Coolidge, and William Howard Taft. Although I hear that cat Taft is a bad mutha…
The concept of Presidents’ Day is too broad…sorry, too woman, so although all the Presidents have a day, not all of them get the same amount of attention. Some are barely worth a mention at one of their family gatherings, let alone a day where they can be forgotten just like they are the other 364 days a year.
Let’s put a pin on that idea for now. It will play into one of my suggestions later.
Then, we have a political divide wider than the seams in Rosie O’Donnell’s stretch pants to contend with. There are Presidents one side or the other absolutely hate. I’m sure there are people on the Left who would rather we not talk about Donald Trump, Richard Nixon, or Ronald Reagan, and likewise there are people on the Right would gag if they had to mention Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, or Joe Biden in any positive way. That makes the concept of a day to celebrate those who we vehemently disagree with as popular as Nick Fuentes Appreciation Night at the Apollo.
Aside from federal employees, I don’t see a lot of people clamoring for Presidents’ Day to be a thing anymore. Then again, federal employees would lobby for a Kyle the Intern Sneezed Day if it meant they got a day off. Now, the easiest way to make it more popular would be to let everyone have the day off, but even then it would be a crap shoot if people would appreciate the reason why. Americans get Memorial Day and Veterans Day mixed up all the time, so I’m guessing they’re not ready to delve into Presidents’ Day just yet.
That’s where I come in.
The first thing I would address would be the fundamental unfairness of Presidents’ Day for forgotten and/or inconsequential Presidents. They deserve a day where their Presidencies are given the respect they deserve, after all. So, instead of having one day a year where we acknowledge Presidents, let’s have two. And by year, I’m including Leap Year. And more specifically Leap Year Day.
That’s right! Every 4 years, we will have a day set aside just for the forgotten Commanders In Chief like John Tyler, Chester A. Arthur, and Gerald Ford, and it just so happens it coincides with the one day a year that’s shoehorned in there so the Gregorian calendar isn’t thrown off.
Next, we need a new way to evaluate Presidents. Right now, that falls on the shoulders of academics and historians who may be fine intelligent people, but aren’t that much fun at parties. Today’s America demands more voices in the intellectual arena with new perspectives and match-ups.
Yep. I’m talking about social media.
I belong to a couple of Facebook groups that set up imaginary fights between fictional characters, mostly comic book and/or pop culture-based. The discussions can get pretty deep (you know, in between the numerous playground taunts about how dumb a poster is), and the possibilities are endless! Who would win in an arm wrestling tournament, Teddy Roosevelt or Dwight D. Eisenhower? Which father-son duo would win a potato sack race, John and John Quincy Adams, or George H.W. and George W. Bush? Which President would be the best wingman for a night on the town? (Answer: JFK.)
It may seem silly, but that’s what America is these days. This sort of fictional fighting would appeal to the general public. Not to mention, there are betting websites that would love to host something like this, and it might help get more people’s skin in the game. After all, America’s new favorite pastime is online gambling, so lean into that and turn Presidents’ Day into a payday!
I do have one more suggestion, but it’s really radical. I mean, it would take an act of God, a massive societal shift, and some zoning permits to make happen, but if we’re willing, it’s worth a shot.
Elect better Presidents.
Extremist Makeover – WNBA Edition
Usually, these Extremist Makeovers involve politics, but this time I wanted to delve into a different, but no less controversial, subject. I have been a basketball fan for most of my life, starting as many kids do: shooting hoops in my driveway. But since I sucked at dribbling, shooting accuracy, passing, playing defense, rebounding, running, and pretty much anything else that is required to be good at the game, I gave up my hoop dreams. Even so, I never lost my love of the game.
That’s why it’s so disappointing to see what’s going on in the WNBA. I know it’s supposed to be professional basketball, but it reminds me more of a pick-up game at the Y. That I’m playing in. And I’m the best player on the court. The offense is spotty, the defense makes the defense played at the NBA All Star Game look like the security at Fort Knox, and there’s less hustle on both sides of the ball than a hibernating sloth whose core temperature has been dropped to absolute zero.
And that’s just Angel Reese.
I’m kidding, of course. Clearly there are women on WNBA teams that could run me out of the gym before the opening whistle, but that’s no great feat. It’s made even more apparent when a player takes a shot her teammates look like the scene from “The Ten Commandments” when Moses parts the Red Sea. The only thing less occupied than the lane in that situation may be the stands at most WNBA games.
That was before a young woman with a dream and an outside shot that she could make from the parking lot on the other side of the country named Caitlin Clark entered the league. Incredible court vision, crisp and precise passing, and genuinely a fun player to watch all by herself. And she’s a clear draw, if attendance, endorsement deals, and TV ratings are any indication.
Yet, the WNBA has a problem with Caitlin Clark, one they’re not ready to admit or resolve. The league simply wasn’t ready for her level of game, which puts a lot of NBA starters to shame. So, naturally, the WNBA did the sensible thing and built the league around her.
Just kidding! They let other players use her as a tackling dummy while the refs and Commissioner turned a blind eye to it. Unless, of course, Clark tried to fight back. Then, she gets called for whatever foul they can find and then has to play nice for the media scrum afterwards.
And that’s not counting the attitudes by WNBA stars and former players turned analysts. Some appreciate what Clark brings to the league, while others curse the hardwood she walks on. And it’s not just the occasional sly throwing of shade, either. There’s actual hatred behind some of the commentary, matched only by the hatred towards Clark with some of her peers.
Needless to say, the WNBC needs a lot of help. And I, being Mr. Helpful, am here to help!
The first step starts with a question: do you want to succeed, or do you want to continue being the NBA’s side piece? Let’s face it, the WNBA needs the NBA more than the NBA needs to learn what traveling is, and considering there’s so much traveling going on players get frequent flier miles during each game, that’s saying something. If you’re not aware, the WNBA is being kept fiscally afloat by the NBA, and even with the Caitlin Clark Effect in full effect, the powers that be can’t seem to figure out how to turn that into a money-making venture.
I know we’re not supposed to attribute malice to a situation that can be chalked up to incompetence, but I can’t figure out which it is in this case. That’s why my question is the key to figure out where to go from here. If you’re comfortable with the status quo, then we’re done here. Enjoy constantly losing money and try to act surprised when the doors close for good.
But let’s assume for the purposes of this sketch you want to make money. Then, the question becomes how can you improve the product you’re putting out for a fraction of the public consumption at the moment. This is easy: hire high school basketball refs. The “professionals” you have miss more calls than Helen Keller (and at least she has the excuse of being deceased). Until the “professionals” can prove they can call a full game without more errors than a Timothy Geithner tax return (talk about your obscure callbacks!), I’m afraid they’re going to have to learn how to do their jobs by watching real professionals do them.
Second, recognize what Caitlin Clark brings to the table and do what you can to protect your investment. I’m not saying let her get away with metaphorical murder on and off the court. Understand she is a once-in-a-generation talent who not only moves the needle, but can help evolve the perception of the WNBA from an afterthought to a must-see attraction. She’s already been the catalyst of change for the Indiana Fever, as the team has really built something special attracting other players who want to play with Clark.
Now, consider the fact Clark is inspiring young girls and boys (and even old codgers like me) to play basketball like she does. That means you might see more Caitlins in the near future, so you might want to seed the ground now so you’re ready when they arrive. And that means you gotta stop setting her up for failure by risking her getting injured or frustrated to the point she can no longer play. Where Clark goes, the fans will go with her.
And speaking of failures, third, stop trying to make Angel Reese a thing. She’s not a good player, and when you consider I’m saying this, you know she’s bad. She’s supposed to be an elite inside player, but her game outside of rebounding sucks. The only thing she has going for her is the fact she’s not that different from a lot of current WNBA players: more meh than marvelous, but able to make a hockey fight look like a Buddhist rave. No amount of social media posts, red carpet events, and fashion shoots will make Angel Reese any better at her actual job.
And while we’re on the subject, the league needs to have a serious sit-down with the teams and explain a very simple concept to them: you’re getting paid to play basketball. Not target certain players to “teach them a lesson” about the way the WNBA is. Not flop more than Lebron James looking for calls, only to turn around and commit a live mugging at the other side of the court. Not spending time on social media promoting themselves or beefing with other players and fans. You. Are. There. To. Play. Basketball.
For the love of all that is holy, at least try to look like you can play offense and defense. A second-year player is making you look bad, just as she did in her rookie year. This is not a time to coast on past glory or because you haven’t had to do any more before now. The game is evolving because of Caitlin Clark, and you can either catch up to keep up or find yourselves left in the dust.
Finally, you have to demand accountability from all parts of the WNBA. That means more fines, ejections, and suspensions for egregious violations, and I’m not just talking about the players here. Coaches, referees, teams, and, yes, even the Commissioner need to be held to a higher standard. Because, and I can’t stress this enough, you are a professional sports league, so start acting like it. Anybody who bends or breaks the rules gets punished. It worked on me when my parents did it to me growing up, and it will work here.
This may be a fool’s errand falling on deaf ears, but as a basketball fan, I want to see the WNBA become more than it is today. That won’t happen without major changes in personnel, attitude, and rule enforcement. Time will tell if the WNBA takes me up on my suggestions (and, believe me, I am open to salary negotiations), but I remain hopeful.
Just like that little boy shooting hoops in the driveway hoping the basketball that goes soaring over the backboard and bouncing off the roof will eventually lead to better shooting.
Well, I’m still working on that, but I’m still hopeful!
Extremist Makeover- Harvard Edition
It’s been a rough few years for the good folks at Harvard University. Controversies ranging from alleged plagiarism by one of the administrators to, well, a whole lotta antisemitism on campus have turned the faces of alumni and administrators…crimson.
I’ll see myself out.
Okay, I’m back. Now, I may not have an Ivy League education, but I have a few ideas to help Harvard out of its current situation.
First off, you have a Code of Conduct that everyone is supposed to follow, but it’s not. When you have a set of rules and you ignore them, it doesn’t end well. You might wind up like Congress!
Seriously, though, the Code of Conduct shouldn’t just be a good idea that occasionally gets enforced depending on the situation (or more specifically the ideology of the offenders). Either have it or don’t. And if you have it, use it!
Along with this, you might want to tone down the tone-deafness when it comes to the anti-Jewish sentiment. I know things in Gaza are as unsteady as Britney Spears these days, but there is a fine line between protesting and menacing a certain segment of students who may or may not agree with Israel’s actions. Not to mention, you might have a few Jewish lawyers lining up to sue Harvard if you don’t turn the anti-Jewish sentiment from an 11 (because it’s one higher) to, oh, a -43.
Now, for the administration to accomplish these two initial steps, they have to stop trying to act like the “cool parents” and start acting more like Red Foreman from “That 70s Show.” Take control of the situation, hand out punishments appropriate to the offenses, and stick to your proverbial guns. Don’t try to reason with the offenders. Don’t coddle them or encourage them. Lay down the law, or in this case the Code of Conduct. And if some of the student body doesn’t like it, call them dumbasses (if you’ll pardon the vulgarity) like Mr. Foreman would do.
Also, and I hate to bring this up, but an Ivy League education isn’t as prestigious as it used to be. Granted, the quality of higher education has gotten a lot lower in recent decades, but Moose Knuckle Community College, Tire and Lube, Hairdressing Salon, and Mini Mart is no Harvard. It used to be an honor to attend Harvard, Yale, or any other Ivy League school. Now, it’s a pit stop for rich kids before they get a nepotism hire or a role in a company that looks more at where you went to school than whether you can actually do the job.
You know, like Congress!
Yes, I know I used that joke earlier. What can I say? I like recycling!
To stem the tide, at least where Harvard is concerned, the administration needs to take academics seriously. That means attracting the best and brightest, not just to attend, but to teach. And that means finding people who want to teach, not just pawn off work to TAs so they don’t have to teach an 8 AM Advanced Bisexual Chinese Poetry About Dwarfs class.
And while we’re here, can we do something about the useless classes and majors that permeate colleges and universities these days? I’m sure there’s a market for The Philosophy of Katy Perry’s Pseudo-Space Launch, but that doesn’t mean Harvard has to offer it. Be a bit more picky than Taylor Swift when tracking down another ex-boyfriend to write songs about for a future album. Strive for the highest quality of curricula and the teachers for them. Sure, you may not get as much money by not offering the aforementioned Katy Perry course, but you won’t also get called out for offering such a vapid course in the first place, so it’s a win-win.
This next bit may be harder to address, but you won’t know if you don’t try. Find professors whose politics are closer to, say, the middle than to the freaky outer limits of the Left. This is going back a few decades, but the best professors I’ve ever had were ones who taught the coursework without interjecting politics, like, at all. I’m sure they had their ideological beliefs, but it was hard to pick out from the material being taught. Professors shouldn’t be punished for having political opinions (that’s what tenure is supposed to prevent), but it shouldn’t be the core of their teaching style, either.
Finally, have a real commitment to free speech on campus. And, yes, that means hearing from all sides, not just the ones you agree with because, believe it or not, there are some intelligent people out there on the Right. Imagine learning economics from Dr. Thomas Sowell, for example. Not only would you get a high-level education on the subject, but it would be in a manner that is engaging, challenging, and thorough.
And given the number of champagne socialists running around on campus these days, they could use an economics course or fifty.
Although it’s going to take a while for Harvard to go from laughingstock to leading the academic world, I don’t think it’s a lost cause just yet. Making a few changes will make the Harvard experience worth chasing again. The alternative is to become the academic equivalent of the “Snow White” live-action movie: underwhelming, over budget, and more sparsely populated than the hairs on Vin Diesel’s head.
Extremist Makeover – Disney Edition
To put it mildly, the current state of Disney is looking bleak, and this is the same company that gave us “The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes.” After getting two of the biggest intellectual properties in pop culture history in Star Wars and Marvel, it was assumed the House of Mouse would be churning out profitable movies and TV shows.
Yeah, about that…
Instead of making money, Disney started making enemies of its core audience. Sure, you had the Avengers movies which raked in tons of money, but live action versions of “The Little Mermaid” and more recently “Snow White” made less money than I did working for a fly-by-night three-day-old sushi franchise called “Still Better than Chipotle.” The fan bases that would normally flock to these movies flocked to the Interwebs to trash Disney’s offerings as “woke garbage.”
And those are the good reviews!
Granted, Disney hasn’t helped matters by putting out woke garbage under the guise of entertainment. Whether it was Kathleen Kennedy stinking up the Star Wars franchise (with the help of J.J. “I Haven’t Seen a Lens Flare I Haven’t Loved” Abrams) or the third wave of Marvel movies and TV shows that have focused more on diversity than, you know, coming up with good stories, it seems Disney has lost its way.
Well, I’m here to help in my own unique way. And considering I’m more of a Bugs Bunny than a Mickey Mouse fan, you know things are bad.
Let’s deal with the elephant in the room, and I’m not talking about Dumbo: you’re driving away potential fans with what you’re doing. I get that you want to grow your base while recognizing the diversity that’s out there, but you’re going about it all wrong. Your approach so far has been to inject the diversity you want to see in the world, wrap it in a half-baked plot, and claim whatever ism you want to blame for the inevitable poor performance. But here’s a little secret.
Not everyone who criticizes the flaming dumpster fires you call entertainment is a bigot. Yes, there are people like that in every group, but you have to try to sift through the hate and trolling to find the kernel of truth. And considering there seems to be a consistent theme of “this is bad and you should feel bad,” you might want to pay attention.
Here’s an example from my own experience. After hearing all sorts of bad things about “Captain Marvel,” I decided to give it a watch. After all, I didn’t want to judge it unfairly and I have an affinity for bad movies. I turned it off after 10 minutes because Brie Larson was so unbearable as a “girl boss” character. I didn’t get any sense of the character she was playing (and I place a good chunk of the blame for that on Larson herself) and I didn’t really care to learn anything more about her. She was just…annoying.
This is one of the things Disney capitalizes on, yet fails to understand in any discernible way: girls want to be princesses, too. Not every girl wants to be a girl boss, and not every female character has to be one to be interesting, or in Larson’s case, not be repulsive to potential fans. Even making Captain Marvel a Disney Princess in “The Marvels” falls flat because she lacks one of the major parts of being one: we like the character.
Compare this to Merida from “Brave.” Although she may be overlooked as compared to the others, she is both determined without being, well, Brie Larson-levels of annoying. And she is, now listen carefully, relatable. We can see ourselves in Merida because she goes through many of the emotions and experiences we do or have. She’s the everyman…er girl…er Princess.
Are you starting to see why “Snow White” flopped more than a drunk fat fratboy jumping into a pool during Spring Break? I’m sure Rachel Zegler is talented, but she didn’t exactly endear herself to the potential audience by putting herself over the Disney cartoon on which her role was based. Even if you wanted to do an updated version, you don’t have to dump all over the source material.
Especially when it’s one of the best animated films Disney has ever done, one that has been beloved for almost 90 flipping years!
This is Marketing 101 stuff, folks. Know your brand and protect it at all costs. In short, don’t use a major IP for an outhouse. In fact, this may be the first step towards Disney regaining its footing: require Disney execs to take a marketing class for an actual grade, minimum grade of a C+ or they get booted. I’ll even allow them to take it at an institute of higher learning suited to what appears to be their intellectual level, Greendale Community College.
By the way, #sixseasonsandamovie.
While the current execs are busy at school, find talent within the company who have an actual passion for storytelling, film-making, acting, et cetera, because these are the folks who will rebuild the foundation of the House of Mouse. Much of the pushback against Disney right now is based on the notion they’re more interested in pushing agendas than producing movies and shows people want to see. And on some level, they’re right.
You have to decide whether the agenda or the final product is more important. Look at it this way. If you want to spread an agenda, you need an audience, and nobody’s going to pay to see your agenda-driven passion project if you’re not making people want to see it. Tone down the agenda and weave it into a good story with characters we feel for. Sure, that means acting roles for the aforementioned Ms. Larson and Ms. Ziegler are going to be few and far between, but I think it will be better for everyone involved. And by everyone, I mean the audience.
Another possible option is to spin off a section of the company that will specifically work on the agenda-driven shows and movies. It will still be part of Disney, just under a different part of the company umbrella. That way you can tell the stories you want to tell without having to worry about having to make money. In short, you’re going to become the brother-in-law who moves in, sleeps on the couch, and eats all the food in the house without chipping in.
As part of this spin-off, you will need people who know about the IPs you’re bastardizing…I mean using. For that, you kinda need the fans you’ve been crapping on to help guide you. For all their faults, they care about the source material and can bring insights into the process that you might not have thought of in your dream to bring an albino quadriplegic gender-queer otherkin Jedi order into the Star Wars universe. Or at the very least, they can devise a canonical reason why such an order exists instead of relying on “muh fee-fees.”
Ditto for the Marvel IPs. Your decisions have turned a guaranteed money-making machine into a product that is lucky to recoup its money. Sure, they hit all the ideological marks you wanted, but that doesn’t mean anything if you’re not getting eyes on the product and driving away potential fans. For example, “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law” has gotten middling reviews and gotten more than its fair share of hatred, some by people who would complain about anything (basically 99% of people online), but some who have a legitimate love of the character.
Of course, when the star of said show goes out of her way to attack the fan base to this very day…yeah, not a good look.
The best way to navigate your way out of this situation is similar to that with the Star Wars franchise: come up with good stories and engaging characters and let them do the talking. And as a Marvel fan, I can tell you there are a lot of characters that haven’t been tapped, but certainly can be with the right approach and with people who actually care about them. And if you can’t find a great story during the entire history of Marvel to adapt, you’re not looking hard enough.
So, Disney, you’re not out of the woods yet, but you’re not a completely lost cause. Let me give you a piece of advice to get you back on track. Take everything you’ve done over the past few years, all the advice you’ve gotten, all the direction you’ve been given, and the like. Then, do the exact opposite. Before you know it, the House of Mouse will be back on a solid foundation.
Of a lot of money.
Extremist Makeover: Congressional Hearings Edition
If you’re like me (and if you are, I’m sorry), you’re tired of watching Congressional hearings. Whether it’s a Presidential appointee or a witness addressing the ever-important question of who let the dogs out, the script never changes.
1. The Congresscritters who support what the person says/believes throws more softballs than at any given summer weekend.
2. The Congresscritters who reject what the person says/believes will come up with the most bizarre “gotcha” questions designed to make them look like they know what they’re talking about. (Spoiler Alert: if they’re in Congress, it’s usually a good bet they don’t.)
3. Both sides get to crow about how well their Congresscritters did.
4. Nobody changes their minds and votes usually fall along party lines.
5. Congresscritters get paid for doing next to nothing.
Clearly, this is not ideal by any stretch of the imagination, especially from an entertainment perspective. If there’s no mystery about the outcome, you run the risk of being predictable and the audience looking for something else to watch. The attention span of many adults is shorter than that of a ferret high on truck stop speed and with a pure espresso and cane sugar IV drip. So, we have to find a way to hook people early and keep them hooked. And since cocaine is neither free nor legal, that idea is out the window.
One tack to take is to turn every hearing into a reality show. Granted, there’s a good chance the boneheads in DC will find a way to screw this up, but there’s a reason shows like “Big Brother” and “Survivor” keep getting renewed: we get to see people at their best and worst. The human drama is the best drama we have and often we don’t need to do much to bring it out. In most cases, all it takes is for the barista to get your order wrong for it to come flowing out.
A Congressional hearing made like a reality show would be a way to get more eyes on the product and make it more exciting. But we can’t stop there! We will need a panel of judges to point out the high and low points of each person, both Congresscritter and witness/nominee. Plus, it will give Simon Cowell work for the rest of his life, so that’s a draw right there! Just get two or three more people and you have your panel.
And of course, there’s sex. Sex sells, so we have to find a way to add a bit of spice (Channel, that is) to the proceedings. Since people can and usually are dragged through the mud during their hearings, why not bring actual mud into the equation? That’s right, boys and girls, I’m talking about mud wrestling! Granted some of the matches we’d get would be like watching the ladies from “The View” in a burlesque revue, but there are some that would make it well worth the wait. It could also be used to settle squabbles between Congresscritters. Imagine if Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton had taken their disputes into a kiddie pool full of mud instead of dueling. History would be forever changed, and a lot more exciting!
Of course, this approach may remove the gravitas of the hearings, but I would argue it was already removed before I got involved. However, I do understand that concern and I have another solution, and we can all be a part of it. Every chair in the hearing room gets wired to a light, but noticeable electric shock. If the audience feels a Congresscritter or a witness/nominee isn’t telling the truth, is avoiding the question, or is acting the fool, we get to push a button and shock them! Not only will it increase audience participation, but there’s a chance it could work as negative reinforcement so they behave. Get shocked enough, and even the most offensive Congresscritter would get straight and fly right.
Elizabeth Warren and Adam Schiff, consider this your warning.
There’s one more alternative I can give that would remove the clowns from this Congressional three-ring circus The Constitution states the Senate has the right of “advice and consent” when it comes to federal nominees, but it doesn’t say how this advice and consent has to be given. With the advent of social media (and, yes, I guess that counts Bluesky), do we need to spend the time, money, and room space to hold a hearing? This can be done over Zoom, Teams, or any other teleconferencing service and the nominees won’t even need to get out of their pajamas if they choose. Imagine a candidate for the Secretary of Education being grilled while in a Spongebob onesy! Not only would it be cute and enjoyable, but it would elevate the perception of Congressional hearings.
Of course, the politicians would hate this idea because FaceTime wouldn’t give them the media facetime they need to feed their egos. All the more reason to do it!
Let me know if you have any other ideas on how to improve Congressional hearings!
Extremist Makeover: MSNBC Edition
If the 2024 elections taught me anything, it’s how much the mainstream media’s influence is waning. And by waning, I mean tanking more than Michael Dukakis in a helmet. And if you got that reference, you are officially old. Welcome to the club!
But there’s one cable news network that has been hit the hardest: MSNBC, or as I call it “the Bluesky of cable news.” (And, for you MSNBC viewers out there, that’s not a positive thing.) Ratings are down, NBC is considering splitting MSNBC from its holdings (it’s not them, it’s you), and even high profile stars like Rachel Maddow are having to take pay cuts.
If anyone needed an Extremist Makeover, it’s MSNBC. Good thing I’m here to help!
Right now, MSNBC is directionless. They can go back to being the “Orange Man Bad” channel (as if they ever stopped), but that route has diminishing returns in its future. They’ve lost a lot of credibility following every Trump-related conspiracy theory and inviting on figures like Adam Schiff to perpetuate those conspiracy theories. They’re behind the times when it comes to reverting back to more straight news, as CNN has already tried to take a step back towards the middle from the hinterlands of Leftistinistan.
Not exactly an enviable position to say the least!
There are two choices that come to mind, neither one attractive in the grand scheme, but necessary to try to sustain an audience. The first is to try to appeal to the middle ground. You can still have Rachel Maddow, but you would also need someone on the other side (preferably not from the not-quite-as-insane-as-Joy-Reid-but-you-can-see-her-sanitarium-from-here group) to balance the scales and offer a different perspective.
And speaking of Joy Reid, you’re gonna have to let her go, as well as a few others. Al Sharpton, Lawrence O’Donnell, Chris Hayes, and hosts of others shouldn’t even be allowed in the newsroom if they were getting coffee for the real journalists. They should rightly be shown the door if for no other reason than to eliminate redundancies. Heck, Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow are practically twins as it is, so why not get rid of the less talented one?
A change in ownership may also be in MSNBC’s future, which could go a long ways towards righting this left-leaning ship. One of the names being bandied about is Elon Musk, who knows a thing or two about bringing balance to a media outlet, as all the Leftists fleeing the Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter can attest. Or would if you didn’t get banned off Bluesky for not being Leftist enough.
On the other hand, it may be too late for MSNBC to gain any amount of credibility in the eyes of the media consuming public. In that case, maybe it’s time to lean into the nitwit Leftist conspiracy theories. Go all out! Rename yourself MSNBlueAnonC and let anyone with an idea that makes Trump look like the Dictator-du-jour. Is there fluoride in your drinking water? Trump did it! Step in some dog waste on your way into a San Francisco Whole Foods? Trump literally just took a dump right there! Make the Weekly World News look like the New York Times!
Wait, wait. I have to apologize for that last line. In no way, shape, or form was I attempting to question the journalistic integrity and prowess of a highly respected newspaper by comparing it to the New York Times. I’m sorry. Now please don’t sic Bat Boy on me!
Anyway, if you’re going to cater to the marginally coherent crowd, make sure it’s the best catering you can do. Sure, this will further tank your credibility and will shrink your audience smaller than the number of people who still want to see the Snow White movie when/if it comes out, but it will be fun. And when you really think about it, if you know you’re on the Titanic and about to plunge to an icy demise, why not have a little fun with it? Do the biggest cannonball you can and never regret it for a second!
Either way, I hope you folks at MSNBC take my advice. Especially on that second option because, although I can’t guarantee its success, I can guarantee it will make me laugh a lot.
Extremist Makeover: Harris/Walz 2024 Edition
With Election Day only (thankfully) a few weeks away, people who have lives are starting to pay attention to the two major party candidates. Even with her campaign of joy (which sounds a lot like the Hope and Change campaign of Barack Obama), many voters still aren’t sure what to make of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. What exactly do they bring to the table?
That’s…hard to explain at this point, mainly because the candidates themselves aren’t talking much to reporters, and those reporters who do talk to them throw more softballs than a pitching machine full of Nerf balls. Needless to say, the Harris/Walz ticket is not burning up the campaign season, even though their friends in the media are doing everything in their power to explain away the ticket’s lack of talkativeness.
Well, I’m here to help. Sure, I’m not going to vote for Barack Obama 2.0 and the Mirror Universe Dick Cheney ticket, but I still want to help, and I think I have a way.
First off, it’s time to drop the easy “We’re Not Trump/Vance” strategy. We know you’re not them, but we do notice you’re taking a few of their ideas to make them your own. You learned well from the current President, Madame VP!
Anyway, the point is it’s not enough to say who you aren’t. You have to convince people of who you are. And that may be a problem in and of itself. For politicians of all stripes, honesty isn’t the best policy, nor does it make for the best policy statements. Right now, the Democrats have a loose coalition of special interest groups that all want the same things often at the expense of other members of the aforementioned coalition. That makes it hard to appeal to a wide swath of voting blocs.
Hard, but not impossible.
With reviews of the Harris/Walz media tours being more negative than a Goth nihilist reading Sylvia Plath (or a typical Gen Xer for that matter), it may be time for a different approach to campaigning as a whole. The current President managed to win the White House by staying in his basement and having his messaging be extremely controlled for reasons we now understand. With all of the questions surrounding the Harris/Walz ticket, though, that’s not gonna work.
So, let me borrow something from my childhood and retool it for the modern day. Back when I was a wee lad, we had these books called Choose Your Own Adventure. For those of you unfamiliar with the series, you controlled where the story went based upon decisions you made, which each decision being played out on a page specified in the book. If you decided to go into the spooky looking house, turn to page 43. If you decided to walk past the spooky looking house, turn to page 59. If you decided to buy the spooky looking house and turn it into an apartment complex, turn to your local real estate office. That sort of thing.
In this particular situation, I think the Choose Your Own Adventure concept could be useful. It would just take some work from campaign staffers to make it happen. And it can start with the Harris/Walz website.
Instead of putting together an expansive laundry list of policy positions, turn it into a Choose Your Own Adventure game. If you want to ban fracking, go to page 28 of the Harris/Walz policy book. If you don’t want to ban fracking, go to page 18 of the Harris/Walz policy book. Then, each page would outline that particular decision’s outcome and instruct the reader to make another decision which will take him/her to a different page, and so on. It may not be the most innovative, but it would be a nice change of pace from the current campaign status quo.
Plus, think of how much easier interviews would go! If a reporter had a question, he or she could just play along and find the answer. No more embarrassing word salads! And if a hostile reporter or a political talking head says, “But that contradicts what’s on page X,” you can point out how that was based on a decision made on a different page. Pretty nifty if you think about it!
So, if anyone from the Harris/Walz campaign reads this, please know I want to help if for no other reason than to encourage more applications of the Choose Your Own Adventure approach. And if you don’t like my idea, turn to page 69 and get out!
Extremist Makeover – Media Matters Edition
Recently, Media Matters for America had to let go of a number of employees because inflation made Uncle George’s checks not stretch as far as they used to. At least they can still stretch the truth as good as they ever could!
As often happens with any layoffs, there needs to be a look inward to see what went wrong and how to improve. Since we’re dealing with Media Matters here, it’s unlikely they’ll do it or if they do they’ll blame those evil right wing liars. However, as an outsider, I’m willing to give them my thoughts and I won’t even expect a paycheck from Uncle George for it!
Let’s deal with the elephant…or donkey in this case in the room: Media Matters is a joke. And I’m not talking a good one. I’m talking Hannah Gadsby doing a knock knock joke on a double bill with Dane Cook bad. So bad, Carlos Mencia and Amy Schumer refuse to steal it.
A lot of that stems from the fact your perception of the world is similar to almost every other so-called fact-checker out there: Republicans always lie even when they’re telling the truth, and Democrats never lie even when they’re using the truth like a moist towelette at a rib joint. Media Matters may not have been the first to do this, but they were certainly the most well-heeled in doing it. And now, everybody and their grandmother is a fact-checker and with a similar track record of failure.
Put simply, fact-checking Republicans is stale, and in the post-COVID world where the people on the same side as Media Matters were caught wrong, lying, or worst yet ignoring the rules they set for everyone else, kinda pointless. If I wanted slanted fact checks with a restraining order against interacting with reality, I’d watch MSNBC. Of course, I’d also be a raging alcoholic because I’d be watching MSNBC, but that’s not the point.
The point is Media Matters needs rebranding. If you’re not going to turn away Uncle George’s money, at least you could lean into the humorous aspects of your fact checks. Granted, this humor is unintentional, so why not make it intentional? There is always room for more parody news sites, and when your only other competition is The Babylon Bee and The Onion, you have an opportunity here. You probably won’t topple the Bee because, well, they’re funny, but you can take a chunk out of The Onion’s readership by being funnier than the past few seasons of “Saturday Night Live.”
And that’s not even that high of a bar when you think about it.
Replace some of your hard-as-a-Nerf-bat-hitting researchers with comedy writers. I mean, Leftists keep telling us how much funnier they are than Conservatives, so let’s see their chops. Hire Jon Stewart and some of his old “Daily Show” writers. At worst, you’ll fail, but you’ll still be somewhat funny in the process.
Now, I’m sure the hardcore Media Matters suckers…I mean Soros trust fund recipients…I mean employees will balk at not only my characterization of their work, but also my proposed solution. After all, in the decades they’ve been in existence, they’ve done a solid 10-15 minutes of good work. You know, give or take an hour. To you I say this: you’re the problem. You take this crusade of exposing right wing lies so seriously it’s clouding your judgments. The reality of the situation is you’re only appealing to a core demographic who are inclined to agree with you.
Ask the former hosts of Air America how that turned out. Provided you can catch them during their break from asking people if they want fries with their burgers. Spoiler Alert: it doesn’t work unless your core audience is willing to part with their hard-earned money to buy the stuff you advertise. That’s where Air America failed, even with some well-heeled donors including Uncle George. If your target demographic is so poor they can’t afford to pay attention, you are in a money pit.
At some point, you will be there, if you aren’t already. Media Matters is a sinking ship, no longer the cutting edge of Leftist thought and research. Granted, it was more like a dull butter spreader than a cutting edge, but you get the point. You’re obsolete. So, you can either stay obsolete or make changes that will keep your brand viable. The choice is yours, but in either case I will laugh, whether it’s with you or at you.
So, win-win, I guess?