Check the scenario, I'ma bust your ear drum

I've never been ahead of the curve when it comes to music. I only recently discovered Robyn - I got one of her CDs library after seeing a video I liked online. Robyn was released in 2008, and most of the songs are a few years older than that, but girlfriend makes Lady Gaga look like Mandy Moore circa 1999.



Now, I love me some Lady Gaga, really! She makes well-crafted pop songs that are dancy, fun, and un-annoying. But let's be honest: well-crafted pop is not very interesting. Robyn, on the other hand, makes dancy, fun pop music that's also weird and thoughtful. It reminds me a little of Basement Jaxx and a little of Ladyhawke, but mostly it sounds new. When's the last time you thought that about a dance track?

"Who's That Girl?" is my new favorite song of the moment. In it she rejects the demands of modern femininity and asserts her right to just be what she wants. The girls of fantasy who are pretty all the time and never say no don't exist, and she won't try to be that girl no matter how much pressure she feels. "Good girls are sexy like every day/I'm only sexy when I say it's okay," she sings, all to a sugary electro beat. It is awesome, and it is something I could stand to hear more often in the pop world.

In conclusion, if you like things that are good, check out Robyn. Konichiwa, bitches!

A Disturbing Ad... Or Maybe Not

A friend of mine shared this post in Google Reader, with a note saying, "Definitely not okay."




















Via Best Week Ever

Three things struck me about this post, one thing at a time. At first, I found the ad itself quite disturbing. In the background, a little girl is asleep or passed out in a bent over position on a couch, with her panties visible and some of her toys nearby. In the foreground, a man is holding his finger to his lips in a "Shhh, don't tell anyone!" gesture. His facial expression is pretty ridiculous, and gives me the impression that this is supposed to be funny. There is some text, but I can't read it. My first thought when I saw it was that it is, as the poster says, Not Alright.

The second thing I thought interesting was the post itself. The blogger at Best Week Ever basically says this is a subway ad from "Thailand or Taiwan or whatever." It was sent to him by a friend who took a photo of it, but he doesn't know what country this friend was in, and seems to think it doesn't matter. He also shows no interest in finding out what the ad is for or what the text says. The whole tone of the post seems to say, "Look at this ridiculously awful pedophile ad from one of those interchangeable Asian countries!"

The last thing I wanted to mention didn't occur to me until I read the comments. A few people thought it was an ad for the air conditioning unit visible on the wall behind the girl. In this interpretation, the ad is saying this air conditioning unit is so quiet that the girl has fallen asleep, and her father doesn't want her to wake up. I have no idea if it is really an ad for an AC unit, but this made me think - the original poster on Best Week Ever, most of the commenters, my friend and I all looked at this image and assumed it was making a joke out of child rape. Off the top of my head I can think of two reasons for this assumption. One is the idea us Westerners have that non-Western countries are less civilized, and therefore places where bad things can happen and no one will care. In particular, Asian countries are assumed to be havens for human trafficking and child prostitution. Though those are very real problems in some countries, that doesn't mean it should color our interpretations of a subway advertisement depicting a nice, middle class home. Another possible explanation for the assumptions I and others made about this ad is that we are used to seeing little girls sexualized in American media. We see ads all the time that show young girls in sexy poses and clothes, so that when we look at this image of a girl asleep on a couch with her butt in the air we assume something awful is going on. But maybe someone who isn't used to seeing children made to look sexy would just look at this ad and see a sweet scene of a girl sleeping and a father trying not to wake her.

Sherlock Holmes: A Love Too Great to Contain

This has been languishing in my notebook for a while now, and I know that for this to be relevant I should have posted it months ago. Let's just say that timeliness is one of my areas for personal growth and leave it at that.

Robert Downey, Jr. said in an interview recently that he thinks Sherlock Holmes is “a very butch homosexual.” This would explain the lack of on-screen chemistry he had with Rachel McAdams. Predictably, the Conan Doyle estate is not amused, and they've said that if Downey doesn't ix-nay on the ay-gay he won't be doing the sequel. This debate is nothing new, of course. There is a long-lasting divide between those who think the deep affection between Holmes and Watson can only be the product of sexxxy times, and those who take offense at the suggestion that their friendship ever transgressed the bounds of straight-laced Victorian manners.

The are-they-or-aren't-they speculation isn't unique to Holmes and Watson, either. There's another detective whose relationship with his best friend is the subject of much winking and nudging. I'm speaking, of course, about Batman and Superman.

“But wait!” you protest, “Wouldn't Batman and Robin be a more accurate comparison?” Many people would agree with you, but you're wrong. Watson may act as Holmes' trusty sidekick, but he's no one's ward. At the end of the day Watson is Holmes' truest friend and equal partner in anti-crime. And, as with the World's Finest, a binary model of sexual preference is just too limited to contain their super love. There is ample evidence that all four men have genuine attraction and interest in the opposite sex, but those feelings will always be eclipsed by the love they have for each other.

The similarities between Sherlock Holmes and Batman are obvious; after all, you can't call your character the “World's Greatest Detective” without paying homage to the original master. Batman, like Holmes, is a solitary man, sacrificing personal relationships for the sake of fighting evil in his beloved but notoriously crime-ridden city. Thanks to their obsessive natures and extreme intelligence, they are both the best at hunting down criminals – and they both feel disconnected from the ordinary humans they fight so hard to protect. And of course, neither man has much time or patience for romance, with the exception of the women who can outsmart them: Catwoman and Irene Adler.

The Watson-Superman connection takes a little more thought, but since I have recently read every Sherlock Holmes story Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ever wrote, I am (by internet standards) an expert. Watson may not be a superhero, but he is a war veteran and doctor. Despite his self-reported character flaws, he is unquestionably a good guy. Like Superman, he is popular with the ladies; in A Study in Scarlet he mentions conquests in “five continents.” Eventually, he and Superman both settle down with smart-but-safe women, who they no doubt love very dearly. But both Lois Lane and Mary Morstan must be resigned to the fact that their husbands will dash off at the merest word from their detective friends, always ready to abandon spousal duties and their day jobs to help out on a case. And, probably, totally do it off-panel.

So why do most people insist on reducing these complicated relationships to a question of gay or straight? Anything beyond those two options never enters the debate. And our understanding of the world's best crime-fighting duos is forever made less interesting.