Search This Blog

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Pet Peeves #22 - 5/15/10

1. Bullies.
By now, everyone has heard about the poor girl that committed suicide because of excessive bullying. Social interactions are an important part of growing up, and the pupose of school is to teach and to groom the social development of children. However, if the schools can't create a safe environment and protect kids from obvious cruelty from other students then we need another alternative stat. How can a child learn when threatened, nervous, abused or bullied? What purpose do the attending teachers and administration serve if they are not preventing this from happening right under their noses? It is proven that bullying scars people in to adulthood and has long-term effect on their lives, so why aren't school staff being held more acountable? Plus, this epidemic may be costing us as a society. Kids that could have grown up to be true contributors to this world are reduced to shells of what could have been; emotionally bruised, timid adults who admit to have abandoned their dreams along with their self-esteem and trust. This is what school is teaching these days? The more I hear about bullying in schools the more I understand homeschooling. Some teachers may argue that they can't be parents and referees too, but you are working with children. This isn't fantasy-land, you know kids can be cruel. Plus, these are dumbed-down, violent times where people don't feel they should be accountable for anything as long as it feels good and they aren't stopped. And this mentality trickles down to the kids. If you can't handle that reality, you can't be trusted to protect what you are supposed to nurture. If you can sleep at night watching some poor kid get humiliated every day, then you get an F. You should take two weeks off, accept the fact that you are sackless, and then quit. For those who think that bullying is 'part of life' and that they should "learn to stand up for themselves" and those who can't handle it "deserve it" are probably the parents of bullies and secretly think it's cool that their kid isn't considered 'weak'. Last time I checked, school was to educate, not see who can make it out alive with the least amount of bruises. Go ahead and be proud that your kid is too stupid to excel at anything in school except doling out abuse. The apple probably didn't fall too far from the tree. Congratulations. Oh, and for those school staff members who punish kids for finally standing up for themselves and fighting back - you should be ashamed of yourselves. So a bullied child didn't make your job easier by just sitting back and taking it, now you're upset that the kid acted out due to pure frustration? Now you're upset? You allowed the bullying to get to that point! You had a responsibility to nip the bullying in the bud when you first knew about it, but you did not. To punish the bullied instead of the bullies makes you accessories to the suffering that child endures. Period. To think anything else means you don't have reasoning skills, which makes me wonder how you got your job.

2. Okay, enough with the 800 pound Gorilla shit.
Speaking of bully-like behavior, I've hit the threshold. I've just about had enough of this 'everybody gotta be a tough guy' schtick that has attached itself to popular culture like Swine Flu. Every reality show guy wants to be an egomaniacal douchebag (i.e. Paul Sr., Jesse James). Every woman wants to be either some ghetto rage machine (just about any Black chick on reality TV, like "New York") or some loud-mouthed "take no shit" princess (i.e., "My Super Sweet 16"). It's not just reality shows. It's everywhere, literally, like a disease. The ridiculous sense of entitlement, the rudeness, demanding respect when offering none. The 'fuck you' swagger, the puffy, shiny, gym-rat 'Roid rage, the over-tanned, fist-pumping designer label wearing 'my shit don't stink' mentality that permeates the air like 20 day-old milk. I knew I was done when driving home last week with The Hubby. I had noticed something hanging from the bumper of the car in front of us. Upon closer inspection, it was a shiny gold scrotum. A pair of balls. A pair of balls hanging from the back bumper of a car. I had to rub my eyes and look again. The Hubby said, "Oh, you haven't seen those before? They come in different colors and some even have hair on them." Seriously?!? WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT OF THAT? Is the driver over-compensating for the fact he's driving a Ford Focus? Why do people, especially kids, need to see a pair of dangling balls from a car? I seriously wonder if these people are from Mars or raised in barns. What ever happened to manners, courtesy, class and just not being a dick? It appears those things show a weakness these days, and that is just mind-blowing. And sad.

3. Reality shows based in New Jersey.
It's easy to feel bad for New Jersey sometimes. The out of control taxes, car insurance issues, the recent severe flooding, forever in New York's shadow, it really just makes you go, 'damn, they can't catch a break'. But it's amazing how TV shows like "Real Housewives", "Jersey Shore" and "Jerseylicious" chip away at that sympathy. I realize that many NJ folks are horrified too, and these shows don't represent the majority of them (maybe it was okay as long as someone else was being stereotyped). I do hope that they get a program on that shows a different type of Jersey native, but until then, if a new show has anything to do with New Jersey, it's going to suck, it's going to be embarrassing and I'm not going to get a refund for my destroyed brain cells. And dear Lord, please, the sooner we can lose Snooki and "The Situation" the better the world will be.

4. "American Idol" has officially jumped the shark.
I case you didn't know, the term "jumping the shark" means any TV show that made a move that officially killed any resemblance of coolness or relevance it once possessed. The term was derived from when The Fonz water-skiied over a shark and drove the stake into "Happy Days". I dismiss the show "American Idol" primarily because they seek to create candy-coated pop singers who start out with an individual style and sound, only to end up sounding and looking just like everything else on radio that is shoved down our throats. That said, I can offer some respect as the judges are/were industry veterans with track records. They make no bones about the product they're looking to groom, and one only has to look at Carrie Underwood and Kelly Clarkson. Those ladies may have never been discovered without the show, and the world would have been denied their formidable un-Pro Tooled talent (and I'm not being facetious here, they are two great natural singers). Plus, they are mega-stars now - their dream has been realized. Kudos to 'em! So the peeve is not A.I.'s formula, or the success the show has received due to it. The peeve is when they get music celebrities on that are short on actual talent but long on good luck - like Miley Cyrus. She was going to be a mentor on the show. Not a judge, but a mentor. SHARK JUMP! What advice can Miley Cyrus possibly give someone who can probably outsing her? How to downplay a famous parent and the perks and obvious advantages that came along with that? How to regularly sing above your God-given register to the point dogs ears twitch uncontrollably? How to feign having paid dues when your fame was practically handed to you? Having kids who are just hitting puberty worship you does mot make you a talent. It means you are dumb-lucky and whoever does your marketing deserved every penny. So you have a TV show and half-way carry a tune? And? This qualifies you to mentor? Oy. It seems many regular viewers thought this season was the worst, so I guess it's par for the course.

5. Taylor Swift Fever
Yes, Taylor Swift is a good role model for young women. Unlike some other young super-stars, she is sweet, modest, and seems to have her head on straight. She also is a good songwriter and apparently writes songs from her heart that have connected with folks of all ages, hence her nominations and oodles of accolades from fans and folks in the music industry (which I believe is completely out of line - she not that great, c'mon, already, folks are just too blinded by her cuteness). She only lacks two things - a solid right hook (for Kanye, that douchebag, see #2 above) and an actual good singing voice. Last time I checked, if you're considered a singer, you should have that. She doesn't. Of course, she sounds good on record, but live, she's painful to watch. She's dancing and flipping her hair all over the place, but "hair, tits and hips" works better when you're a dancer - not when you can barely carry a tune and struggling to stay on-key. This isn't just based on her horrendous duet with Stevie Nicks, (that was a hot mess); this is based on other live performances I've heard her do. She is not a good singer. Sure, not all legendary singers are technically great, but they bring something more to the table in vocal character and LIVE they are on-point with what they do. Taylor's voice is average with studio magic and much less than average live. She's a good writer - let her write songs for other singers with bonafide vocal chops who can really max the songs melodic value, especially in a live setting, for the freakin' love. Taylor is up for two awards for the CMA's - Entertainer of the Year and Female Vocalist of the Year. I would be less offended if she won the Entertainer of the Year award than the Fem Voc award, because you can entertain a crowd without a great depth of talent. Taylor has clearly has worked her butt off this year entertaining the masses and is just as deserving of that award as anyone else in that category. But, to get a win in the Fem Voc category against true vocals giants like Martina McBride and Carrie Underwood would be a disgrace. She is not in the same ballpark, not in the same town, hell, not in even in the same hemisphere as those ladies vocally. If I were Martina and Carrie I would be totally offended that Taylor was even nominated. It's not an experience (age) vs. 'lack of' kind of thing. When Christina Aguilera came out, she was as good as Mariah and Whitney who are older and more seasoned. Christina has the vocal gift. Period. Taylor Swift DOES NOT have the vocal gift. I'm sorry - I want the singers I hear on radio, TV and especially live, to be amazing, to show and to justify why they are on that stage and have the fame that they do. When they aren't great on a basic musical level and don't live up to their title (i.e. singer), I can't respect them no matter how many records they sell, how elaborate their stage show, or how hard the media tries to shove them down my throat.

No comments:

Post a Comment