Fox News New Years Eve Disaster

Clearly, we can see where Fox News’s interests lie.

Sex.

Did you watch their New Years Eve show? I hope not. It was a huge waste of time. Half of it was models walking down a runway. What a useless show it was only about sex. The women were modeling clothes (which is one thing if we’re modeling them to show off a designer’s work, but I have no idea who the designer was, if there even was a designer[which I doubt there was]), but then they modeled skimpy swimwear that barely covered anything.

Why are these women modeling swimsuits? It’s the beginning of winter. The end of December. No one wants to buy a swimsuit. They are modeling them only for the sex appeal of it all. They want to show women’s skin. That’s it! Useless show. Clearly no longer a family show.

And then! And then they had the models talk about what they sleep in. What did most of the models answer? Nude. Classy, Fox News. Really, really classy.

What’s more, who do they have to entertain the masses? Carmen Electra.( She sang a song about how she likes loud music. Truly, a talented artist.) Who is she? I had no idea. I had to Google her. Here’s what I found out. She made her claim to fame though Playboy Magazine, then through an MTV game show called Singled Out where people compete for a date, and then through Baywatch. Way to go, Carmen. You seem to have made quite a name for yourself.

Sex!

And that annoying host? What was his name? Who cares! I hate him more than both of the X-Factor hosts combined! He thought that calling a woman “Barbie Doll” was a good compliment. At least, I think he was complimenting her. The only thing Barbie has going for her is an unrealistic plastic body… which doesn’t sound like such a great thing to me.

Way to show a positive role model for little girls all around the world, Fox. You really took it up a notch, this year. Hell, it was better than Dick Clark.

Advertisements

Molly Weasley is a feminist

Molly WeasleyMolly Weasley is in fact a feminist. Some people think that she isn’t a feminist because she’s so grounded in domesticity, but her motherhood does not negate her feminism.

Some people have argued that the final fight scene between Molly Weasley and Bellatrix Lestrange is a symbolic fight between motherhood/domesticity and feminism. They say that motherhood is chocked full of characteristics that feminists despise. They say that J.K. Rowling wrote from a Christian perspective to show the value of true womanhood or some other bull like that.

It’s not true, because feminists don’t hate motherhood. Feminism is about equality between the sexes. Giving women every opportunity that a man has, and every advantage, and every right to do so. A woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her life, and should be able to accomplish that goal if she works hard and is good at that particular thing. She shouldn’t be held back just because she has ovaries. This encompasses everything from a Fortune 500 CEO to a stay at home mom. To each her own.

Not my daughter, you bitch!

Not my daughter, you bitch!

The very idea that feminists could somehow despise motherhood is beyond. That’s just blatant anti-feminist propaganda  Feminists clearly want us all to stop be loving, nurturing, and warm. Of course those evil feminists want all women to be barren so they don’t have to be afflicted with the sexist burden of children.
Molly Weasley Chuck NorrisIt’s true that Molly doesn’t fit the traditional feminist roll; nonetheless, Molly Weasley is a feminist. She’s strong, independent, nurturing, determined, intelligent, strong-willed, loyal, loving, egalitarian, the head of her household–a house filled with mostly boys, and she can fight. She is a fierce warrior who is deadly with a wand. Molly Weasley is not the embodiment of family fighting against the embodiment of something else. She’s a feminist fighting for family.

Mr. and Mrs. Family Values

A white, middle-class, southern boy, born into a single-parent family, raised by his mother alone, who grew up and divorced his first wife, has never paid alimony or child support, has no contact with his children, had an affair, and has a lesbian sister who is starting her own family. Who could such a model of diversity be? Why, it’s Newt Gingrich!

What about this one: A mother of five children, one a newborn with Down’s syndrome, leaves home to pursue a career as the CEO of a major organization. She has a taste for high fashion. Her husband, a union worker and part-time fisherman, goes along for the ride. Her unwed sixteen-year-old daughter is pregnant and the baby’s father is another sixteen-year-old whose MySpace profile says he is a “redneck” who loves dirt bikes, “loves to play hockey”, and does “not want kids.” Then his mother is arrested for selling illegal drugs.

Did you guess? That’s right, it’s Sarah Palin. Granted, this is from a few years ago, back when she had a great view of Russia. (I know, cheap shot.)

 

These families aren’t really the “traditional” families America is looking for, right? They’re not the husband and wife, 2.5 kids and a pet in a house with a picket fence that dominate our culture. Except this 2.5 kids thing isn’t exactly the norm anymore, and hasn’t been since around 1950 or so, if ever. Only one out of every ten families look like the “norm”. The rest looks like: wife breadwinners and stay at home dads, two working parents, single parents, divorced parents, second marriages, childless couples, adopted children, unmarried couples with and without children, blended families, gay and lesbian parents, etc., etc.

Surely, this is evidence that the family is crumbling; our beautiful, sacred marriages are being corrupted and destroyed. I mean, half of all marriages end in divorce! What other evidence could you ask for?

But it’s not. Americans clearly still believe in marriage. After they get divorced, they get remarried. And if that marriage fails, well then you’re on the prowl for until-death-do-us-part number three! Or in Larry King’s case, wife number eight.

Marriage and the family has been as resilient and diverse as the American people themselves. We’ve been debating for the last century whether or not the family is in crisis. People were sure that if women got the right to vote, the family would collapse. They knew if women were allowed into college, the increased blood flow to their brain would dry up their ovaries and the human species would die. They thought if women went to work, the household would fall into shambles and the children would grow up emotionally-wrecked felons.

Marriage and the family adapts and changes as we see fit, as everything must that is going to survive. And if marriage can survive the family collapsing, ovaries shriveling, human extinction, a generation of rampant child criminals, and the 21st century, I don’t know what we could do to kill it now.

That’s right, even you, Kim Cardassia–Oh! I’m sorry, Kardashian.

                                                                                                                                                                My mistake…