Speaking of Revenge Of The Nerds

…is it not the most racist, sexist, misogynistic and bigoted movie made since Birth of a Nation?

Never mind the whole premise is to cast athletes as uber-villains against the benign nerds.

But they have the black guy actually chucking a spear. Their retaliation against the sorrority is to put in spy cameras everywhere and publicly humiliate them.

Dude, Louis essentially rapes Betty–and she likes it! Falls in love with him, wants to date him, etc. That’s pretty messed up right there.

Of course, she’d been hanging out with Stan–and you know he was hittin’ her and takin’ what he wanted when he wanted–so I suppose Louis was an improvement. Still, you don’t know what a sneaky nerd is gonna do if he thinks he can get away with it.

We won’t even go into the intimations of child molestation, as when the young Harold goes looking for a place to live and encounters a much older woman who behaves very inappropriately toward him.

Or am I over-thinking this?

(Was this post overly-Althouse influenced?)


You know, if those nerds had guns in the beginning of Revenge of the Nerds, they could’ve shot the jocks when they kicked them out of the freshman dorm.

Of course, then they never would have experienced the journey that allowed them to ultimately conquer their poor self-esteem.

So I guess I’d have to come down against guns on campus.

One o’ them Internet Meme Things: Autobiography Title

Kelly over at Loaded Questions offers her “Sad Revelation Of The Day”. In this case, that her ideal autobiography title is already taken. Amusingly enough.

So, she’s suggested–nay, demanded–I put my ideal autobiography title here so that someone can steal it. Here it is:

Does Not Appear To Be Working To Full Potential: The Story Of A Diligent Slacker

I suppose Fred Thompson will steal it for his forthcoming bio.

Boring Myself

Ever have that feeling? Where everything you say, write or think seems boring?

Nah, me neither.

I’m hip deep in servers and user errors and paperwork and to-do lists, all of which are interesting in context, but deathly dull in the wild. Details, the devil is in. God is in. Acedia is in….

I did finish reading Trying Neaira, which I’ll write a bit about later, and (I hope) not too boringly.

Confession Time

For the record, I rather liked Sunshine. Not great, but with a lot of good moments.

I also like Sarah Jessica Parker.

I don’t like alcohol. I don’t like food cooked in alcohol if I can taste the alcohol (and I almost always can).

Madonna used to impress me. In the great pop music diva wars of the ‘80s, I placed my street cred on Cyndi Lauper (over Madonna) being a musical force into the future. After getting over being wrong, Madonna’s persistence surprised me. But I’m back to thinking she’s played out. (I hear she has a new CD coming, so who knows.)

Natalie Dormer
makes a far hotter Anne Boleyn than Natalie Portman. Portman is lovely but I can’t see her radiating the sort of seductive sexuality that Dormer does on “The Tudors”.

Virtually every director I loved as a kid and was excited to see more of petered out by the ’80s. Not one has lived up to Howard Hawks or Alfred Hitchcock or Frank Capra. This is not surprising, but it is somewhat depressing.

On the Internet, No One Can Tell You’re A Jerk…Oh, Wait….

It’s no secret that the Internet brings the worst out in people. The prior candidate for the worst jerkiness you might personally encounter on a daily basis was the automobile. And people are still remarkably rude and belligerent out there on the road, suggesting that we really didn’t have enough freeway shootings.

But the Internet is special. Just as no one knows you’re a dog, no one can slug you for being a jerk. (Actually, they can, but most won’t bother.) This is how people justify their shenanigans over at Althouse. Sure, they justify it by claiming she’s a conservative but pretending that she’s liberal, and therefore worthy of any punishment, but at some more visceral level, they justify it first by “can I get caught”?

I’m inclined to believe that the Old West was incredibly civil, in places.

Anyway, one particular subset of bad internet behavior is (mostly guys) dissing on (mostly female) celebrities. Recently, over at Ace’s, he posted a picture of Sarah Jessica Parker. The usual crowd ripped on Mrs. Matthew Broderick–though, actually, on the scale of internet disses not that severely.

This sort of thing used to shock me. I’ve always found locker room talk amazingly vulgar, to say nothing of the callousness evident in people’s attacks on celebrities. I’ve known a few celebs–grown up around a few, even and, as a general rule, they’re people. (I’m not ruling out that some aren’t, just none of the ones I’ve met.) They don’t look much like their on-screen personae, and they’re never like you’d imagine.

As a result, I tend to think, in this case, the reaction of various female bloggers is off. Not necessarily in reference to their own reactions–cause, duh, those are what they are–but to various other issues, like the internet being a public social area. I mean, it is that, but it is that like a port-a-potty is that, or a strip club is that, or a Star Trek convention is, if you like.

Internet destinations are ultimately self-selecting. The nastiest comments I’ve seen of this nature are on Fark. There’s considerable self-knowledge amongst most (I hope) of said commenters: The “pointy knees” meme, for example, which suggests that it’s perfectly rational for an ugly toad to reject a gorgeous woman on the basis of some trivial, probably imagined, flaw–this may have been posted seriously once but became forever after ironic. In any event, you don’t deliberately go (and you can’t be forced to stay) some place you don’t like.

Ever few years, I visit Fark or (more frequently) Slashdot or various other sites, but ultimately I tire of the tone, and stop going for months or years at a time. I think the real issue here is that the women involved do (to some degree) like the sites in question. They expect better from them (for some definition of “better”). Ace has admonished against accusing any women of internalizing, but sort of amusingly, that’s exactly how it read. Or if not internalizing, then generalizing.

Of course, there is a mixture of braggadocio, glibness, sour grapes and poor humor in a lot of these comments, as well as more than a bit of internet-empowered jerkiness. In fact, one defense offered by an Ace commenter is that these women hold themselves out as sex symbols and therefore can be judged that way with impunity.

In fact, looking at it, it’s really no different from the schadenfreude that many women seem to enjoy in following celebrity news. It’s just a different target.

‘course, I have no intention of linking myself at any of these other blogs.


I’ve been fascinated by sims since I came across John Conaway’s Life (play here) in one of David Ahl’s “Basic Computer Games” books. It’s interesting (to me) because it uses a very simple set of rules to create a seemingly infinite number of patterns.

It strikes me that you could layer a bunch life games with rules that were dependent on the other layers, and created a fairly lively ecosystem that was both robust and fragile (those are not necessarily exclusive). Check out the Gosper Glider Gun pattern in the second link. It creates a pattern that has static parts, and the static parts create a dynamic pattern; if you add a cell that can cause an explosion which results in the cell’s extinction or creates a new static pattern or creates a new dynamic pattern.

But I was thinking of it today because of Micropolis, which is a port of SimCity for the OLPC. I have most or all of the SimCity games but I’ve never played them very long. I’ve always found them too rigid for my liking. (But I keep buyin’ ‘em.) I did like Afterlife, as mentioned on this blog before.

But here’s the thing that struck me. If memory serves, SimCity is all about the laying down of various zones (residential, commercial, industrial). But that’s a particularly American view of development, isn’t it? I don’t know, but I’ve heard that European rules are not nearly so strict–with the subsequent argument that our divisions fuel (as it were) our need for cars–and I have to wonder whether this sort of development isn’t rather alien to the village kids who have received the XOs.

But I suppose the beauty of this implementation is that the kids can change the code….