It seems there are only white people in Canada. Canada is so smug about its multiculturalism, you'd think it would actually make a point of showcasing its diversity in ways besides making visible minorities share the small screen with Sheila McCarthy. But two recent television-watching experiences have led me to question whether this country is, in fact, populated only by Caucasian, sweater-sporting executives and their blonde, Queen's University-attending children.First, there was Top Chef Canada. I was willing to look beyond the host (Thea Andrews, who, coincidentally, is blonde and graduated from Queen's University and calls to mind that episode of Seinfeld in which Kramer suffers from Mary Hart-related seizures) and the fact that a strangely high number of the contestants appear not really to be able to cook. What I find hard to accept is that they couldn't have included one contestant of a non-pale hue. Apparently, the show's (unnamed) defenders claim that "the contestants were chosen based on ability, not on location, gender or race". That just means that there happen not to BE any women or minorities who are as good at cooking as these white men are, which is especially distressing as most of these white men appear not be very good at it at all.Then there was the whiteness of the recent election debate. I'm not referring to the fact that all four leaders and the host were white (and also men - although Steve Paikin is a Prince Among Men, which sets him slightly apart). I'm talking about the fact that all six citizens whose videotaped questions were shared were white. They were careful to balance the sexes (three women [all blonde, as far as I can remember], three men) and the regions represented, but made no effort to vary the colour scheme. One of the women had an accent, but that was about as diverse as the evening got. Are Canadian television producers so obsessed with regional diversity and not looking like the only place they care about is Toronto that they forget there are other forms of inclusiveness? I find I have been retroactively protesting their lack of inclusiveness for years by forgetting about the existence of Canadian television. Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
Hooray for Stephen Harper! He's finally decided to emulate a politician other than himself. Unfortunately, it's Tim Pawlenty.
Never heard of Tim Pawlenty? You're not alone - most Americans haven't either. A former Republican governor of Minnesota, Pawlenty is right-wing, looks like one of those Mormons who proselytizes on the subway, and is stultifyingly tedious. He is currently not setting the campaign trail on fire while running for president.
Harper's choice of role model may initially seem surprising, in that he is already right-wing, subway Mormon-ish, and stultifyingly tedious. However, he's not trying to imitate the OLD Pawlenty; he's trying to imitate NEW Pawlenty.
Pawlenty recently released a non-campaign campaign ad clearly intended to prove he is VITAL, CHARISTMATIC, and PATRIOTIC. If it had been released in the form of text, it would be all red-white-and-blue capital letters. It features noises, and flashes, and quick cuts, and then more loud noises: It is extremely silly. It took Stephen Colbert no time at all to release his own, slightly less earnest version (his response to the original ad is at 4:53, his own ad starts around 6:58 - because I'm in Canada, I can't access the just-the-bit-I'm-talking-about versions available to Americans).It took Stephen Harper only slightly longer to release his own INSPIRING and PATRIOTIC version:
Hooray again for Harper! He has succeeded in reinventing himself as Canada's Tim Pawlenty, in that he is proving himself to be equally as dull and desperate. He's even one-upped the American, in that he's also managed to add derivativeness to the mix.
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
There are certain well-established truths that left-wingish people are fond of continuing to establish. Many wars are about economic interests - economic interests related to oil, for example. Many, if not most, people vote for the politician who looks most like a smooth-haired family man from the 1950s. Both facts are, of course, completely regrettable: wars, if they are to be fought at all, should be waged for staunchly humanitarian reasons, and people should vote for the politician with the most thoroughly-articulated and admirable policies. I, in fact, am one of those individuals who thinks you really shouldn't kill people to protect defenseless oil or vote for someone based on the eerie immobility of their haircut.
That's why I find myself in an awkward position. Canadians are going to the polls again for the 156th time in the last five days, and it seems I really object to one of the party leaders. Not because I think he's misguided (although I'm not saying he isn't) and not because I object to his Positions on the Issues (although I'm not saying I don't), but because I don't like his face. I'm not referring to Stephen Harper, who I think is clearly misguided and square-headed, or to Jack Layton, who is like a feisty and adorable self-promoting terrier, but of Michael Ignatieff. I don't like Michael Ignatieff's face.
Of course, I do dislike him on other grounds reminiscent of school (of the high-school or Sunday variety). He delivered the commencement address at one of my graduations (that's right, I said "one of" - I've often been educated, I'll have you know), and spent most of the time talking about how various intelligent and accomplished people had told him how intelligent and accomplished he was. I just think even if some world-famous musician tells you you're bright while vacationing at your cottage, you should keep it to yourself and not be a big, fat braggart.
But even if I hadn't decided he was a bit too fond of himself and not sensible enough to know or care not to show it, I would still have a problem with his face. He has a few basic, unfortunate looks:
A) The Most Nefariously-Eyebrowed Nefarious Ruler of Hell (couldn't find a photo credit for this one):
B) The "I have a meatball in my mouth - a whole meatball!" Awkward Eater (once again, no photo credit) C) The Guy From A) Trying Desperately to Look Approachable (ditto) D) The Guy From the End of Raiders of the Lost Ark, Just Before the Loss of His Face (Chris Wattie/Reuters) It's entirely possible that Ignatieff is a perfectly nice and intelligent person and that I shouldn't judge him negatively based on one speech that struck me as boastful and a number of facial expressions that strike me as terrifying and/or profoundly unfortunate. But couldn't the Liberals just save me the effort of having to question my biases by finding a leader who combines the principles of Jack Layton or Elizabeth May with the mystifyingly voter-luring square-headedness and sweaters of Stephen Harper?
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
Maclean's is on a roll. First, they published a daring article daringly entitled: "Too Asian?" (and now just-as-provocatively re-entitled "The Enrollment Controversy") about whether Asians were taking over Canadian universities. The fact that they didn't distinguish between foreign-born and Canadian-born "Asians", or indicate they realized there wasn't, in fact, one country called "Asia" which created all Asians, was worrisome because it means I found it difficult to determine in how many ways the magazine was being racist. Now, they have proven they have bravely refused to learn anything about thoughtfulness by publishing a list that compares and contrasts two groups known to regularly inspire a good belly-laugh: escorts and hookers.I'm profoundly relieved that Eye Magazine and Toronto Life also noticed and commented on this list, because by the time I went back to look at it again, it had mysteriously disappeared. It is now only available via screengrab in the Eye Magazine article.Scott Feshuk (who wrote this piece and, apparently, many speeches for a man well-known for his satirical hooker humour: Paul Martin) claims that he intended the list as a satirical response to the ways in which the media characterizes escorts and prostitutes. As Kate Carraway of Eye notes, though, "That's a good idea for a story, but writing it in a way that indicates approval and participation rather than satire is a problem." Also problematic is the fact that even if it were clearly satirical, it still wouldn't be very funny. Well, I wouldn't mind being paid to write for a Canadian publication, so here's my application:Maclean's Hookers - attempts to - performs sexual sell magazines acts in exchange for to the same money.demographictargeted by Rogersand Tim Hortonscommercials bysuggesting thatCanadian universitiesmight be imperiled by sinister Asianhordes.- attempts to - performs sexual satirize media acts in exchange for establishment's money.attitudes towardssex workers byseemingly rep-licating those sameattitudes towardssex workers. - read largely - substantially moreby parents popular.of prospective undergraduatesand Peter Mansbridge.
What do they have in common? I've never given money to either of them. Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
It's not so long ago that left-leaning Americans thought of Canada as a paradise of pot-smoking, honeymooning gay people. I know that because I once read an article about it in The New York Times. Then, the Americans forgot all about our frozen tundra of progressiveness when their political Rapture arrived in the form of a new president (who's since managed to disappoint, but is still widely acknowledged to not suck nearly as much as the last one).Canadians seem to have succeeded in embracing the neo-Conservative movement of the '90s a little late. That is by no means an original observation (although if you have never heard it before, trust me: it is a totally original observation). We have a right-wing prime minister who will probably continue to be prime minister largely because his sweater vests are more appealing to voters than the entirety of his opponent, who in every photo strongly resembles Satan. Don't remember his name? Just read the most recent government news releases, which no longer refer to "the Government of Canada" and instead mention something called "the Harper Government."Stephen Harper is trying to campaign through every mention of Canada's national government; Rob Ford, the new right-wing mayor of Toronto, is branding himself by creating his own imaginary country inspired by the name given to fans of the city's perennially not-playoff-making hockey team. Leaf fans live in an imaginary place called "Leaf Nation." Recently, Ford referred to his supporters as "Ford Nation" and spoke of setting this nation loose on the provincial government if it didn't pony up some cash for Toronto. The name is unintentionally apt, as citizens of Leaf Nation are certainly defined by a constant and crushing sense of disappointment. As an inadvertent and bitter citizen of Ford Nation, I can relate.So I've gone from basking in the glow of American left-wing envy to living under "the Harper Government" in "Ford Nation". I'm so despondent, it's like I'm practicing to become a Leafs fan.Click here to sign a petition demanding that Stephen Harper stop naming the Government of Canada after himself.
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
I am worse than Rush Limbaugh. I don't mock people with Parkinson's from some underground lair via ham radio, but I have managed to be worse than Rush Limbaugh nonetheless.Rush's most recent attack on the Obamas (that I'm aware of - a whole day has passed since I heard about this one) involves Michelle's weight and dining preferences. Michelle Obama has made reducing obesity in America her First Lady platform, and Rush finds her activities to that end meddlesome and hypocritical. He claims they are hypocritical because "...our first lady does not project the image of women that you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, or of a woman Alex Rodriguez might date ever six months or what have you." He's not alone. A conservative cartoonist has produced an uproariously funny and artistically distinguished depiction of Michelle Obama eating a giant plate of hamburgers. By all means look at it, but be warned: you'll have to read a hell of a lot of Doonesbury to feel clean again afterwards.So why am I worse than Rush Limbaugh? Rush is criticizing Michelle Obama not for being fat, but for being a hypocrite. He's wrong, and he's insulting, and he's paranoid, but he's not just making fun of someone's figure for the sake of it. I, however, have made fun of someone's figure just for the sake of it.When Rob Ford was elected mayor of Toronto, my post was graced by the following image:  Someone's Been Eating the Gravy Train Rob Ford is undeniably full-figured, and he does talk a lot about a sinister gravy train, but that doesn't mean I should have made a joke about how he's been eating said train. I knew it was cheap and unfair at the time, but I did it anyway.
So Rush Limbaugh unfairly makes fun of people for being fat hypocrites, while I apparently, make fun of people I don't like simply for being fat. I shouldn't have to resort to making cheap and unfair cracks about Rob Ford's appearance when there are so many substantive and justifiable cracks I could be making about his policies.
This week, Rush Limbaugh acted as my moral compass. Perhaps next week, Glenn Beck will teach me an important lesson about intellectual integrity.
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
 Side effects may include: corncob pipe, eyes of coal, and the thumpetty thump thump (I made no cracks about 'snow balls' because I am classy). I do not have any particular problem with The Toronto Star - I just happen to be a nasty-minded, self-appointed critic of the honest work that other people do and get paid for. And because they're often paid for honest work that happens to be insensitive or ill-advised, my mind stays nasty.
This time, it's Karen von Hahn, a fashion columnist for The Star, who's wowed me with an inspired turn of phrase. Of Canadians in winter-time, she writes:"...because we are all as overdressed as toddlers going out to play in the snow at recess, we lose the spring in our step, shuffling along like overmedicated mental patients and slouching in our many dull-coloured layers like sulky teenagers."While I admire her attempt to pack as many similes into one sentence as possible, and I admit that teenagers can indeed be sulky, the mental patients angle seems a bit off. How off? As off as under-medicated mental patients, of course. And what's almost as disquieting as the fact that von Hahn thinks things that might be insensitive (and I'm thinking more of the feelings of the mental patients than of scarf-wearing Canadians) is the fact that she then proceeds to share them. Which brings me to my new acronym: INSTALS. INSTALS stands for "if not sensitive, then at least sensible." How often have you watched the news and thought: "if you're dishonest enough that you're going to cheat on your wife, at least don't do it by sending shirtless photos of yourself to a stranger on Craiglist and using your own name, making it easy for her to google you and find out you're a two-term Republican congressman"?
If you're not going to be sensitive enough to refrain from committing adultery, at least be sensible enough to use an alias and hire a professional. If you're not able to be sensitive enough to refrain from thinking that bundled-up Canadians look a lot like sedated mental patients, at least be sensible enough to refrain from saying so. Although I admit I'm looking forward to summer, when no doubt van Hahn will write something about spirited, under-dressed, warm-weather Canadians capering about as though they're jumpy, crack-addled whores. Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
 It's not crazy: Torontonians could rise up against their democratically-elected government and demand democratic elections. It's easy, when you live in a place like Toronto, to feel intimidated by other places, like, for example, New York and Indianapolis - places bursting with culture and atmosphere and exploitative journalistic practices. When I saw this clip of an Indianapolis reporter roaming the streets making homeless people sing on The Daily Show, I couldn't help thinking: "Why not here? Why not in Toronto? Why can't Toronto's news outlets callously capitalize on the public interest generated by certain current events, too?"Well, proof that Higher Powers grant my wishes as long as they don't bring anyone any certitude, or peace, or help for pain was not long in coming. Behold the following story teaser from February 8th's Toronto Star: Recent events in Tahrir Square, where Egyptians have been ushering in a revolution, have got us thinking: if the revolution were to happen in Toronto, where would it unfold? The Star's Christopher Hume takes a look.Magnificent! We're really proving that we've got a media scene the equal of any in the United States. I don't want this kind of cheeky journalistic ingenuity to wither on the vine, though, so I'm offering the following suggestions for future Star articles:- The recent to-do over Egypt's unpopular despot has got us thinking: which of our local politicians could be considered the "Mubarak" of Toronto City Council?
- The recent violent crackdown on peaceful protesters in Egypt's Tahrir Square has got us thinking: if Toronto residents were going to rise up and then be viciously repressed, which animals would those viciously repressing them ride in on? The Egyptian thugs used horses and camels: keep reading to discover our suggestions for a distinctly Canadian battle beast.
And it doesn't just have to be about Egypt. Any topic of considerable contemporary interest will do. Here's an example of a non-Egyptian attention grabber: - The creation of Southern Sudan, the world's newest country, got us thinking: what's changed in the day-to-life of Torontonians since East York, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, York and the former city of Toronto were amalgamated into a single municipality in 1998?
See? Easy, effective, and fun! Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
Yes, it's true. There's blood in the water. Democratic dolphin blood. That's irresistibly drawing Republican sharks. While minnows (young people) and stingrays (independents) leave the dolphins undefended because they're too busy being disillusioned and unemployed. Or something.Although I feel my analogy was apt, consistent, and unforced, I am going to set it aside for now. As most Americans have set aside the dreams of the Democratic party.I am thrilled that Americans have rediscovered Republicans and embraced diversity by electing an orange man to the House, but my joy is muted. Many of my favourite candidates were unaccountably passed over. Christine O'Donnell (anti-masturbation, "I was a witch"). Sharron Angle ("Don't I look Asian?"). Carl Paladino ("My eyes only fully open when I see a woman having sex with a horse"). Most distressingly, Rich Iott of Ohio failed to win election to Congress. This despite the fact that for years, he proved how much he loves politics, history, and costumes by participating in a Nazi re-enactment group. He very plausibly claimed to belong to this group because of his love for politics, history, and costumes, and because he was looking for a way to bond with his teenage son. Makes sense. My father and I used to regularly reenact Ukraine's Holodomor in an attempt to appreciate one another more. Rich Iott's courageous example, though, has not been in vain. An exciting news story out of Campbellford, Ontario proves that the Iott approach to historical re-enactment has caught fire north of the border. At the Campbellford Royal Canadian Legion's recent Halloween party, two unidentified men won the prize for best costume for a delightfully cheeky - and educational - joint get-up: one man appeared in full KKK regalia leading his friend, in black-face (inevitably) around by a noose. I don't know whether to laugh knowingly or be informed!I can only conclude that they identified Halloween as a teachable moment par excellence. That they, like Rich Iott, believe history must continue to live in order to bequeath its lessons. You never know - maybe those two men were also father and son and they found the perfect way to turn bonding into bondage.
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.
POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
Finally, some good news for Toronto, Ontario, Canada! For too long, Toronto has been putting all its energy into becoming Copenhagen. Or, at the very least, Helsinki. It's been prioritizing (or trying to prioritize) bicycle-riding hooliganism, green energy-related propaganda, and giving everyone welfare without any strings.
Now, thankfully, the times they have a-changed. Left-wing blood has been spilled on the tracks. And whatever else you think of that could be done to a Bob Dylan lyric/album title.
Torontonians have spoken and they have spoken loudly and with glorious senselessness. They have elected a man named Rob Ford. Allow Rob Ford to speak for himself, as he regularly and recklessly insists on doing:
If you are not doing needles and you are not gay, you wouldn’t get AIDS probably, that’s bottom line. These are the facts. – June 29, 2006
Every year we have dozens of people who get hit by cars or trucks. My heart bleeds when someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day. – March 7, 2007
And my personal favourite, because of its modern sensibility:
Those Oriental people work like dogs. I’m telling you, the Oriental people, they’re slowly taking over. – March 5, 2008
He's fearless and shameless. And by all rights, he should feel a great deal of both fear and shame, which just shows how fearless and shameless he really is.
The liberal elites are weeping and creating grant-funded performance art pieces; the right-wing Average Joes are driving their ATVs through protected wetlands in celebration.
I am personally excited and encouraged by Ford's win for two reasons.
1) Toronto is finally proving to the U.S. that it can play in the big leagues. Sure, we once had a discount furniture store owner for mayor, and he said the following: "What the hell do I want to go to a place like Mombasa?... I'm sort of scared about going out there, but the wife is really nervous. I just see myself in a pot of boiling water with all these natives dancing around me." But Rob Ford improves upon Mel Lastman because he manages to be equally offensive, but more of a bully. He may not have been a high-school warlock or hired a male escort to carry his baggage through Europe, but he did once drunkenly harass tourists at a hockey game (while a city councillor). Here's hoping he'll up the ante while in power.
2) 380,201 people voted for Rob Ford, which means there are still 380,201 people I haven't met in the City of Toronto!
Send the Catastrophizer your requests for advice and/or rationalizations using the form conveniently provided HERE. I will publish my responses on the THE CATASTROPHIZER page.
POLITE DISCLAIMER: This site is intended for entertainment purposes only. If you are not entertained, fair enough. Also, I'm not very good at copy-editing, so if something looks wrong, it was put there by accident.
|
RSS Feed