Table-Flip Tuesday: Andrew’s “Do-Not-Be’s”

such rage, much fury

such rage, much fury

I thought I’d take a break from the four-page-long thesis-style format I’ve established for “Table-Flip Tuesdays” up to this point; instead, what I have for you lovely geeks, this go-round, is a list I have compiled, which I just decided to start referring to as my “Do-Not-Be’s”.

Spoiler alert: this is a list of traits, characteristics, and just plain people I feel you, well, should not be. Why? Because these traits, characteristics, and just plain people irritate the crap out of me. (Hence the “Table-Flip Tuesday” outlet.)

Pay close attention. Take note, if needs be. And, above all else, if you find that you happen to be one of these things listed below: Don’t.

[Note: For sake of consistency, “that guy who…” will be in reference to everybody and anybody. It’s not sexist exclusion; even if you’re a female who fits one of these points, you’re still “that guy who…”]

DO NOT BE…

… that guy who says “Can I ask you a question?”

… that guy who fast-forwards/skips the opening title sequence of Doctor Who.

… that guy who thinks I’ll be impressed by the figurines of nearly-nude versions of female superheroes you have, lining the walls of your house.

… that guy who hums/whistles along to a song in your head, while another song is playing over public speakers, at the same time.

… that guy who comments on my Vines, but never likes them.

… that guy who pronounces it “heighdth”.

… that guy who uses the “shave-and-a-haircut” cadence when knocking on a stranger’s door.

… that guy whose Twitter profile is set to automatically follow another user, based on a recent like, only to unfollow said other user until the next time said other user likes another post.

… that guy who’s the opposite of Batman.

… that guy who was okay with the Dexter series finale.

… that guy who intends to heat dinosaur-shaped chicken nuggets in the oven, only to get drunk after putting said dinosaur-shaped chicken nuggets in said oven and then pass out, leaving it up to your roommate to come home to a smoke-hazed house, finding the culprit being said dinosaur-shaped chicken nuggets, which have now become dinosaur-shaped charcoal briquettes.

… that guy who vapes for the sole purpose of being able to say “I’m not smoking” when told the vapors are bother those around you.

… that guy who sticks out your tongue while using the dog-face SnapChat filter, even though it clearly instructs you to “Open Your Mouth”.

… that guy who constantly asks for favors and punctuates the query by saying, “No pressure.”

… that guy who holds up pedestrian traffic, just so you can practice your “jump-shot”.

… that guy who says, “I guess that means it’s free!” (followed, in most cases, by inane guffawing)

… that guy who goes to pick up someone from their place of apartmental residence and, instead of parking in an actual parking spot, sits in the thoroughfare, blocking the vehicles of the neighbors of said someone you are picking up from their place of apartmental residence.

… that guy who affects a terrible English accent while at work, forcing it not only upon your coworkers but also on the clientele.

… that guy who gives me crap about actually enjoying Man of Steel.

… that guy who leaves those annoying postcards advertising the latest and greatest new-age religious thing under people’s windshield wipers; or on any part of their vehicle, for that matter.

… Ted Mosby.

Alright! I think that’s a good list for now. Don’t think this is a finite listing – oh, no! This is just a healthy smattering of those irritating traits, characteristics, and just plain people who irritate the crap out of me; some on a daily basis, while others on a purely, sadistic nostalgic front. In time, just you wait, there just might be a “Part II” of this list. Until then, however…

#tableflipped

Tabble Flap – by Sean Ryan

seantableflap

In the most recent episode of Mating Habits, I was called out for having said that any woman who is hyper-sexual—or even has a healthy sexuality—must have gotten it from “daddy issues”. I have never said such a thing. Or at least, I’ve never generalized it that way. If you think I have, clips or it didn’t happen. It’ll give you the chance to revisit our awesome episode archive.

Oh sure, I’ve made jokes and glib comments about girls with “daddy issues” (especially “the fun kind”) and people who act out from having their “antennas bent”. But my understanding of people’s sexuality isn’t as simple as a direct line from A to B.

Kelley and Paris are absolutely right. Some women just really enjoy sex. Some women just don’t. Both are cool and shouldn’t be stigmatized. Kelley is also right in that the phrase “daddy issues” is often used as a cop out or hasty judgment of a woman’s character. Kelley and Paris mentioned in the podcast that their sexual appetites aren’t the result of any kind of childhood trauma, and I believe them. At the same time, I can’t deny that women with “daddy issues” do also exist. They’re just not who Kelley and the gang are discussing in that episode.

Here’s the thing: “Daddy issues” are real. The phrase is often horribly misused, but there is truth to it.

“Daddy issues” spring from a variety of things; not limited to molestation. Physical abuse, neglect, abandonment, personality clash, alcoholism… All it takes is a shitty role model to affect our behavior as adults. Or as I tend to put it, that’s how some people get their “antennae bent”.

That trauma very commonly manifests into how we handle sex and personal relationships. It’s a strange but real phenomenon where we re-enact our trauma. Typically as a way to manage our feelings or as an unconscious attempt to grasp control over the demons that haunt us.

Some women with “daddy issues” come to recoil from sex. I’ve dated a couple of those. Some women with “daddy issues” work them out through sex. I’ve dated many of those…which may also say a lot about me. Most of the latter ended with the girl sabotaging the relationship by stirring up chaos and drama.

That’s all not to say that anyone who acts out sexually is “damaged goods”. Many hyper-sexual women are happy and able to maintain healthy relationships. I’ve also dated a couple women who have just had healthy sexuality, which I consider a blessing.

My advice is to give women the benefit of the doubt. Just enjoy the ride (*wink wink*). At the same time, be aware of red flags that suggest that this person may be wrestling with some baggage that could spill into your relationship with them,. It’s all fun until someone gets hurt.

RECOMMENDED READING:

Sex After Trauma (Pt. II): The Psychology Behind My Promiscuity

What Motivates Sexual Promiscuity?

Dr. NerdLove: It’s OK To Want Sex

Table Flip: Ghostbusters

such rage, much fury

such rage, much fury

Let’s start this thing by not mincing words: this past Thursday, the official trailer for the new Ghostbusters was released; if you didn’t like it, then you’re wrong. Period. Exclamation point.

I’m going to be completely honest with you when I say that I was originally on the side of the non-believers, the purists, the “don’t take away our Ghostbusters” proclaimers. At that time in my life, I felt as though too many things from my childhood, things that guided and molded me into the person writing this-here blog post today, were being taken and reshaped into something to appease and appeal to a “newer” audience. The “ain’t broke, don’t fix” mindset came to the fore; if you want to introduce a new audience to an already-popular franchise, what sense does it make, reinventing the franchise in order to achieve that?

As it turns out: it makes a whole helluva-lotta sense!

We’ll look at another franchise, near and dear to my childhood heart, that has had its fair share of reinventing and having said reinvention brought to life, once again, on the big screen: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Comic book origins aside, I had grown up with the cartoon series and graduated to the live-action movies; mind you, Turtles in Time didn’t hold up as well as the first two for me, so I reverted back to the animated stuff, faith restored in the movie versions when the computer-animated TMNT was released. When Nickelodeon decided to reboot the animated series, I was fine with it – especially after seeing a few episodes with my nephew, and seeing how much of an homage it was to the classic cartoon series.

But hearing that Michael Bay was going to be releasing a series of live-action Turtles movies? Oh, fuck no! We can’t be having any of that! Not only was it a poor choice to have Bay, of all people, involved in the project – what with the rumors going around that he was going to make said “heroes in a half-shell” of alien origin and completely destroy the lore – but ultimately it came down to: Why? Why does this need to be a thing?

After having conversations with several friends, said friends being on both sides of the argument for the movie, I decided to give the recent Turtles movie a chance… and was sorely disappointed that I had spent the money on a ticket. When asked what I thought of the movie by a friend, I proceeded to jokingly reply with: “Let’s just say that I had a cop, afterward, ask me to point on the doll where Michael Bay had violated my childhood.”

In reality, though, my childhood stays in tact, what with the classic series available on DVD and Nickelodeon doing a damned fine job holding their own with the current animated series. No, what ultimately bothered me about the recent Turtles film was the fact that, at multiple times, the narrative asked that viewers both disregard as well as remember the original source material; the story that those of us seeing the movie in our mid- to late-thirties had grown up watching. It was very jarring, jumping from a mangled back story to, out of nowhere, bringing up the fact that Leonardo and Raphael have some kind of deeper sibling rivalry going than they did with the other turtles. Add to the chaos a Shredder who was more Transformer than badass ninja warrior guy dude, and you’ve got a new image to put next to the definition of “trainwreck” in the dictionary.

It was on the heels of accepting the trauma of the recent Turtles movie that I heard about the new Ghostbusters movie. Regardless of the casting decisions (I couldn’t care less if the cast were all-female this go-round) I was not so keen on the idea of yet another ‘80s staple brought back out of the archive, dust blown off, and shaken around in Hollywood’s attempt to keep pumping out stories for the movie-going crowd. I was immediately on the side of “No, no, no. Dear God, no. For the love of everything that is sacred: NO.”

However, after having conversations with a few people who were, again, on both sides of that proverbial fence – some with me on the “No” train, others who were okay with it – I started to steer more into the idea of being okay with it, to the point of actually being curious as to what this version of the story could bring to the proverbial table. If nothing else, said steering was caused by those who were of the same mind as I was, as far as “No” was concerned; however, that was about as far as our causes aligned. The biggest criticism I saw was against the all-female casting, and it was ultimately this criticism that made me rethink my own criticism against the idea. With that, I started to analyze my own “reasons” for my negativity, and when it was all said and done, said negativity was found to be completely ridiculous and uncalled for.

If nothing else, nothing is being taken away from the children within us, who grew up with the original Ghostbusters series. Just like I mentioned with the Turtles, the original movies are available to own on DVD and Blu-ray; in fact, they’re probably even available to watch on such streaming applications as Hulu or Netflix. They’re not automatically locked in some kind of vault, never to see the light of day again, just because this new movie is gaining a life of its own – we’re not dealing with Disney, here. So calm down, nerds: your precious childhood is still in tact.

Also, let’s be honest for just a moment here: like with most ‘80s films, Ghostbusters is a bit dated. Not as much as Back to the Future (as that actually deals with actual dates), but you can tell that, compared to films being released these days, there’s something slightly off about the original Ghostbusters. This is not to say that there’s anything wrong with the original; but try to get a child or teenager to get into the series now, and you’re more than likely to get a bored look, followed by a flagrant show of aggression in the form of said child or teenager putting their Virtual Reality helmets back on and getting back to their blasted Dan Fogelberg and Pac-Man video games.

Quite frankly, this new Ghostbusters is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t – that much, you can already tell, only from how this first official trailer has drawn a clearer line between those who are giving it a shot and those who are ready to shoot it dead. The trailer itself pops, with an updated version of the original theme to induce goosebumps for anyone with a lick of positive nostalgia. (A theme that, while very catchy, was kinda-sorta stolen from Huey Lewis is structure. Just sayin’, purist nerdboys.) It also gives us a look at the characters and the sparkly special effects.

But let me tell you, what truly guaranteed my dropping of the dollars for the price of admission was the Ecto-1: the vehicle our rag-team crew used to not only get around New York City, but also as a mobile advert for their bustin’-of-the-paranormal business. I have an affinity for the vehicles in these supernatural/Science Fiction genres (ex: gotta love the likes of the TARDIS, the Millenium Falcon, the Serenity, the USS Enterprise, etc., etc.) so I love the looks of both versions of the Ecto-1; however, it’s the individual origins of these two vehicles and what they represent that have my nerd-dar… erm, ner-adar… whatever, nerd radar beeping fanatically.

In the ‘80s universe of Ghostbusters, the Ecto-1 was fashioned from a 1950s professional ambulance, while in the new Ghostbusters, it’s fashioned from a hearse. One gives off the message of “We’re here to save the living”; the other, “We’re here to deal with the dead”. For a series whose new vision of the universe involves a flip-flopping of the gender roles, having the four leads be female while the secretary role is played by none other than Thor Odinsson, the juxtaposition of the Ecto-1 between versions makes even more sense. And shows that some thought was put into making this version; at the very least, it makes me, with all my head-canons and hypotheses, believe extra thought was put into it – and that’s what matters.

And, yes, that is what I got from the trailer. The trailer that was only a couple minutes long. The trailer that was meant to show a little bit more than what we had to go on already. The trailer that was meant to spark conversations regarding the film it was promoting.

Some feel that the trailer was horrendous and “un-funny”. I’ve already put several words to this table-flip, so I’ll consider to make the attempt to not belabor this point for too long. As I said before, this trailer was damned if it did and damned if it didn’t. The way most trailers run, these days (unless you’re JJ Abrams), you can save your money on buying a ticket, and just spend the time piecing together all the bits from every trailer released for any one particular movie – I mean, if I didn’t want to go out and socialize recently, I probably would have done so with the recent Marvel films. And it’s that type of mindset that led to feeling like seeing these movies was some kind of a chore; yes, there were a few things that were left out from the trailers, but pretty much every “good bit” was shown several times over in the trailers.

I feel this trailer for Ghostbusters was simply a means to show the bright and shiny new things about this universe. New characters? Check. New vehicle? Check. New ghost-bustin’ weapons? Double check. Shiny new logo? Checks all the way to the bank.

With all that, I’m completely fine with not feeling that the trailer didn’t highlight as much of the comedy as many of my friends and fellow podcasters felt it probably should have. Then again, you’re dealing with a franchise that originally starred Bill Murray – tell me, friends: with that in mind, did you truly think the initial trailer for this movie was going to have one-line zingers to top that of Murray himself? Or maybe that’s the point of the vehemence toward this film and its trailer.

Either way, I have faith in this film. Needless to say, there’s been plenty of shite to hit the cinemas recently that have not received the amount of vitriol that this trailer has; some, I must say, more deserving.

All I’ll say is this: if you’re not happy with this latest Ghostbusters film based on the trailer, that’s fine. You’re wrong, but that’s fine. It’s just a movie, and if you’re letting it affect you (“to your core” – I’m looking at you, Lynch), then it’s already won. It’s already in your head, and sooner or later it’s going to plant the curiosity in your mind as to whether or not it’s as bad as you have mentally built it up to be.

So let’s see what more comes from the studios before the actual film’s release. Or not.

#tableflipped

I’m Creeping in Your Medias…

creeper-girls_o_1621845

I have a confession to make.

If you’re my friend on social media platforms, and you’re single, and you’re one of those lovely vague posters (now subtweeter) I’ve probably creeped through your comments and replies. I only do it under the following circumstances:

I think you like someone, or I suspect someone else likes you, and the two of you have an interaction.

Whether it’s for show research purposes – watching two human beings flirt with one another, or whether it’s out of sheer voyeuristic delight, I love to see how my friends and acquaintances interact with one another.

It will start with a vague post: one of those vague-booking or sub-tweeting dealios where someone says something akin to, “I hate when it’s a beautiful day and I’m alone with nothing to do.”

When I see these posts, I get ready – there’s about to be an onslaught of “Likes,” comments, and rapid-fire messaging unloaded by the equally alone. Some will be timid and only Like or Favorite the post. Now, these Likers could have a twitchy click finger and be the types to like almost anything: photos of your cat, the fan page for RC Cola, a tip from your coworker about traffic on I-40 being at a stand-still…again…for the third time this week on a Wednesday. But some of them are silently saying, “Hey, I’d spend time with you – only I won’t say this to you in words. Your passive-aggressive attempts to make plans won’t be enough to draw me out of my shell.”

Then there are the Return-vaguers, who reply with an, “I hate that, too,” or a “I was thinking the same thing.” Some of these commenters probably just want to commiserate, but the Return-vaguer is actually one-upping the poster on their vagueness. Translated, they’re saying: You said you want to do a thing – instead of suggesting a thing, I’m going to say I ALSO want to do a thing in the hopes that YOU take the risk of asking me to go do that thing.

Then, there are the fast commenters. These are the deal-sealers who comment or direct-message with something like, “I’ve got tickets to an outdoor show and would love take you with me.” Even if they get rejected, they’ve put themselves ahead of those who passively Like, Favorite, or even Return-vague. Often, these people end up spending the day with someone any possibly having a great time, while all the timid Likers and Return-vaguers stay in and wonder why their tactics aren’t working. I see this on my social media feeds multiple times a week, and I am entertained.

So, yeah, this is a weird thing that I do. I find personal interactions fascinating, and if I know you, it just makes it better. Thanks!

sneakykitty
“I’m peeking at you, bitches.”

Observational Ramblings…I’m in a dating slump.

funny-cat-pics-meh1

I spent the weekend “supervising” a space that my friends at Bottom Shelf Films were using to film an entry for the 48-Hour Film Project — not that they needed any supervision, but I’m gettng off-topic here — and I noticed something that has changed in the way I approach dating.

See, since I can remember, I have either been in a relationship or I have been looking for one.  When single, I used to enter a room full of people and immediately assess which men in the room were available to me and then, of those, which I would choose to pursue.  When in a relationship, I often tried to keep a “Plan B” on the side – someone who I would potentially try to date in the event that my current relationship failed.

However, as of late, I’ve noticed that I enter rooms with potential “Dateables” and immediately say, “Nope.  He’s not here.”

Now, I’ve been dating for quite some time and I can scan a room of 30 men and tell you which three are at the top of my predatory list.  The difference is these days, I don’t pick out the top three.  It’s as if I used to make the best of any potential dating situation, no matter the selection.  These days, if I scan the room of 30 men and there isn’t a guy that really appeals to me, I don’t approach any of them.

I no longer go out with guys from OKCupid to simply practice dating or just to have something to do.  I have stopped trying to kindle old flames with exes or with guy friends with whom, for whatever reason, I was never able to make it work.

I oscillate between being panicked about possibly missing out on opportunities, and satisfied that at least this way, I won’t rush into another bad relationship.  It’s a strange feeling to proclaim that at 36 years of age, at my current “fitness level” and professional status at this stage of my life, I’ve become so selective about who I choose to date that I say, “No,” more often than, “Yes.”

Leaving Writers’ Workshop last night, I passed through Atomic Empire and only gave a cursory glance to the many guys who were there playing games in the store.  The last time I was single, I would have made good eye contact and zeroed in on at least one of the guys there and tried to flirt.  But this time, I just couldn’t be bothered.

And I think I’m okay with this.

I wanted to go home and work on the next MHMG Episode and plan for my upcoming NYC trip anyway.  I’m pretty sure I won’t find the future Mr. Kelley Hightower at a NYC Pride event, but that’s okay, too.  He’s out there, and I’ll know him when I see him.