Friday, January 30, 2009

How I wasted an hour at work...

I was reading blogs at work--you know, like I do--and I came across this somewhat offensive, certainly odd, article (via Pandagon, via my friend Yvon's "Shared Items" on Google Reader). After reading the comments, I felt the need to throw in my two cents (or, as it turned out, four numbered items).

I'm a little proud of what I wrote, so I've copied it below. It's probably more entertaining if you read the original article by Jules Crittenden first.

Several things…

1) The morality of neutrality is a moot point if you’re trying to argue that Sweden was not really neutral. Or were you trying to say that there’s no such thing as neutrality, just cowardice? In that case, why does it matter which country Jessica Alba said? Perhaps you’re trying to insinuate that Alba supports Nazis with her “ball bearings”? I’m just not quite sure what you’re going for here.

2) According to Mary Stella:

“Obviously, some are trying facts, Truth, and history; to trump, liberal feelings, their exceptionalism or entitlement to be always right without ever bothering to read a historical book, considering at times failing to finish highschool.”

Questionable punctuation, spelling, and syntax aside, I find the argument that either liberals or conservatives are uneducated or ignorant to be silly. There are very intelligent people on each side. There are high school dropouts in the ranks of both Republicans and Democrats. To anyone trying to make a political or social argument: “You’re stupid!” is not a strong rebuttal. Therefore, I would like to apologize if I sounded snide when mentioning punctuation, spelling, and syntax. I’m sure Mary was just in a hurry.

3) I fail to see how Alba’s possible blunder in saying “Sweden” instead of “Switzerland” has any bearing on whether Bill O’Reilly is an “a-hole.” He IS an a-hole. Regardless of whether you agree with his views, he’s extremely rude to the guests on his show. Also, let’s not forget the “F**k it, we’ll do it live!” ridiculousness.

4) You say: “Girl should stick to doing what she does best.” Really? You don’t like smart girls? But then you say: “Hot and smart like that … what a package.” Huh. I guess only liberal women should keep their mouths shut and look pretty. I’m sure you know this already, but… that’s just not going to happen.

Pedantically (but with good intentions),
MC

I realized there at the end how condescending the whole thing must sound, but I thought, "Aw, screw it. I'll just add a self-deprecating sign-off line to make it all better."

READER POLL: Does a self-deprecating sign-off make a pedantic commenter seem like less of an a-hole?

I fully expect both my readers to reply.

6 comments:

  1. It makes you seem a little more innocent, like maybe you didn't know you were rubbing it in his face. But in reality, you're brushing that dirt off yo shoulder.

    Speaking of questions, I'm trying a blog. Lame is the key word.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Eek. Is "brushing that dirt off" a good thing? Or does that basically mean I'm a douche-bag?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hell no, especially in this situation. That article is the same sassy scathing opinionated crap from everyone who gets their facts from Wikipedia and wants to be like Perez Hilton. You win.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks!

    P.S.: Nice start to yer blog, mister.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey MC! Found you while reading Garin's blog!

    You called him out, I love it. There should be more opinionated people (in a useful way), that said, strong women around. Weird structure for a sentence...

    The self-deprecating sign off does take down the after burn from your slap. I feel like you're his teacher and you took him aside the playground to tell him what he did and why it was wrong and how he should approach the future.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ha, Cassandra, I just re-found your comment... thanks! I like the teacher analogy. Hee.

    ReplyDelete