Flying the Friendly and Annoying Skies 6/22/2015

You step through the doorway into the big metal tube.

You are greeted with a fake smile.

Everyone steals a glance at you.

Some stare.

The people with an open seat next to them give you a quick look - a look to size up you and your smell - before quickly diverting their eyes faster than a student who doesn't want to be called on in math class.

You can almost hear their silent prayers of "Don't sit next to me! Oh God why!?  Please don't let that THING sit next to me!"

You glance at your ticket again, as if something has changed in the last ten seconds since you glanced before.  You squint at the faded seat numbers...row 6...row 7...better check that ticket again...okay, my row is row 31....so....row 8.....row 9...wait...row 31 right?  Yeah.  That's right.

All in all it is a somber experience.  We all paid too much to be here...I know I know, "you're paying for safety and comfort"...but in an industry makes over 175 Billion...with a B...a year in the USA alone, something tells me the chair which has the year 34,200 BCE chiseled into the side of it by: INSPEKTOR THAG could use a smidgen of an upgrade.

Flying in coach is not a great or pleasant experience.  It is something you must endure to get where you are going.  We do it because we must.  Some people don't mind a good ol' plane flight.  Some people do.  There are many factors to what goes into a flight, but above all else it isn't the food or the stewardess who was hired in 1927 and, judging by her wild hair and 1000 yard stare, hasn't left the plane since, that determines your in-flight experience.  Oh no...no, no.

The main factor in enjoying your flight, apart from the not crashing part, is who sits next to you.  Terrifying indeed, because it is something you often time have no control over.

There are many perils on board an airplane.  They come in all shapes and sizes - literally no one is safe and danger can strike at any time, from any one.

There are a lot of culprits to beware of on an airplane.  I am just going to include a few today I feel create the biggest danger to you, the honest and pure air traveler.

In no particular order we have: the Comfy Necker, the Pre-teen Pele, the I'm at Home-er, the Awkward Aisler.

Let us look at these individuals more closely...

The Comfy Necker 

This guy.

This fuckin' guy.

You can tell immediately when you have encountered a Comfy Necker.  These people almost always come prepared with their own neck pillow strapped to their spine before they even get on the airplane.  More often than not, they possess slip on shoes.  It is something I have noticed, you'll just have to trust me.

If the neck pillow isn't already in premier napping position, it will be strapped to them somewhere as an immediate identifier.  Hell, they may as well just walk around like this:

Things start out okay.  They don't talk to you.  They don't move about so much.  They quietly sit there and grab the in-flight magazine...

...but wait...

...what's that?

They didn't bring their own book?

I mean, I guess people read the in-flight magazine...

NO.  NO THEY DON'T.

THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO READ THE IN-FLIGHT MAGAZINE COULD VERY WELL BE A COMFY NECKER.

EDUCATE YOURSELF.

No one reads it for current articles.  Hell, the last one I read ended with "...and that is why one day man will walk on the moon" followed by a "5 Questions with Michael Jackson" about his upcoming Thriller video.

Now, to be clear everyone has gone through the magazine.  It is a 2 or 3 minute time killer to see how bad the person who tried the crossword puzzle in the back really was.

I admit to have rifled through this magazine nearly every time.  On longer flights I find I can't plow into the same book for hours and hours, no matter how good it is so this provides a much needed short distraction.

But only the Comfy Necker will read it.

As this neck-pillowed mouth breather read up on "Ten Things to do in the Ottoman Empire" - you suddenly realize what you're dealing with here.


This is the Comfy Necker.

So as the plane fires down the runway they set the magazine back in the kangaroo pocket and lean back.  They let out a grunting sigh, and no matter how quiet, you know the clock has officially started ticking.

Maybe it starts as a barely audible exhale of air.  Maybe it is honest to goodness snoring right from the start.  But when you are trapped about 10 inches away from someone who will comfortably sleep through the flight and breathe into your ear, you may very well feel stabby.

Even worse is when the the Comfy Necker is on the aisle seat.  Now you have to wake the person up, usually twice because these assholes fell right back asleep in the 90 seconds you were gone, every time you or the window seat needs to use the restroom.

The double-whammy with an aisle seat Comfy Necker is their neck will bob, much like a newborn giraffe or one of those wooden snakes you hold that go back and forth, but invariably their melon will lean towards you, away from the aisle.

I hope they brushed their teeth...

The Pre-Teen Pele

You sit down.  You notice there is no one behind you. Perhaps this is your lucky day?  You can recline your seat all the way back and just enjoy the ride. Maybe.  There is always hope. 

The people filter past you.  But you hear something in the distance.  In fact you hear them before you can even see them.

Here comes "The Family".  

Every flight has one.  It is the group of 5 or more people who are related...and not really the happiest about that fact.  Usually the mom is holding one of the smaller humans while the dad is loaded up with all of their carry on luggage, struggling through the aisle praying for a lack of oxygen to make them all just pass out for a spell so he can enjoy the peace and quiet.

With a thump they enter the row behind you.  Of course.  The parents think they have it figured out.  one parent per row of kids, that way they are always there to supervise.

This is incorrect.

Look parents, if you have more than 2 kids, odds are one of them is probably a d-bag.  

You know which one it is, we know which one it is.  

You have to hedge your bets and surround this child.  The other's will be fine!  They will learn and grow from this!  But one parent alone cannot handle the mess that is your Pre-Teen Pele.

They get everyone settled.  You consider the slim possibility this may not be too bad and you settle in.  At least 4 times one of the parents has to get up to shuffle through the backpack of one of the kid - and it is never the right bag on the first try - for a toy or a drink or a stuffed animal.

The plane is in the air, and it is pretty quiet.  The thrill of flying has occupied the mind of this little devil...for now.

But soon it starts.  It begins with a slight shifting in the chair behind you.  Then you hear the seatbelt buckle clip on and off, on and off. 

You hear the whispered shush from the parent who is tending to yet another of their  children...perhaps this one has no pants on for some reason.

Then there is a silence.

A silence you can almost grab and put in your pocket.

And much like the scene in Jurassic Park...the silence gives way to an every increasing rumble...

It is beginning.

The kicks start barely grazing your chair, but soon they start to find a rhythm and amplitude.  It is an inhuman sort of beat as the legs of this future long kicker start to swing freely.  It isn't bad enough of kicks to react...not yet...but that is where this is headed.

It is...unavoidable.  

But you can feel the wrath inside of you with each noisy caress of this kid's size 7's.  Don't give into your hate!

At a certain point you give a signal, one you hope the parent recognizes.  

A cough, perhaps.  Maybe a very heavy shift in your seat?  

Surely that must work...but alas, it does not.  The incessant pounding continues on until you are forced to administer "The Look".  

We all know "The Look".  

We can all do "The Look".  

The problem is, the look only really looks like "The Look" on a very select few people.

Some people can give a look that will stop traffic for miles.  Others look more like they just got a letter saying they weren't accepted into their dream college.  It just doesn't look like "The Look" on everybody despite the fact they are, in fact, doing "The Look".

Once this inevitably fails you try to establish eye contact with the parent.

Sleeping.

Well mayb...hey, wait a second.  

Did I just see them peek at me by opening their eye a small bit?

Holy cow...are they faking being asleep to avoid their child and the inevitable confrontation that will follow?

That is amazing.  Just amazing.

And you want to grab the tiny, rhythmic little bastard and threaten them as you've done in your head SO many times - and looked cool doing it - but you don't.  You give one last gasp of a reaction and simply wait until he gets bored of making you angry.

All you can hope for is one day he or she grows up and gets to experience the same punishment they dealt out to you for themselves.

The I'm At Home-er

You settle into your couch with some snacks and a drink for a movie.

The phone rings, you answer.  Maybe you have a chat.

You get up a few times - maybe to go to the bathroom or maybe to just get a snack.  You fidget on your couch, trying to find the optimal level of comfort.

This is your house. 

That is your right.

But, for the love of all things holy - STOP DOING THAT ON AN AIRPLANE.

THIS IS YOUR SEAT.  THIS IS MINE.  DO YOU SEE HOW THEY ARE ATTACHED!?

NO, NO I WON'T LET GO OF YOUR FACE.

This person always comes equipped with a carry-on bag that will stay with them.  They are considerate in that regard, they don't make you get up while they sort through their bag...

...but they sure as heck will make you get up about 5 times an hour for any other reason.  Bathroom, chase the beverage cart, just to go say hey to someone they met in the terminal...you know, to catch up on things.

They will constantly shift in their seats.  Maybe you'll get the rare one that will talk to their little seat-back TV screen like they were at home. 

"Don't go in there!"

"Ugh, do you believe that?"

"Oh I do remember this part..."

They aren't talking to anyone in particular, they just fail to realize they are trapped in a pressurized aluminum tube cruising at 35,000 feet while traveling at 600 mph along with a few hundred other people.

No big deal.

They treat their airline seat like a tiny condo on the 10,000th floor, almost completely unaware that they are yelling when they think they are talking due to their headphones.  They don't realize their bottle of water has wandered into the aisle and is now a sure twisted ankle for some unlucky bastard.

While you would like to evict them from their one-chair condo in the sky, murder, as it turns out, is still illegal at 35,000 feet.

The Awkward Aisler

This is possibly the most difficult person to identify in terms of things that can make a flight less than comfortable.

I have spent some time thinking about this one, well, as long as I have been clicking away on the keys here, and I think I have a somewhat frightening revelation for you all.

The Aisled Awkward can be anyone.

ANYONE.  

It can be one person one minute, and another the next.  Does it repeat?  It could.  It is like that horror movie...you know the one with that guy who did the thing?  Where he touched someone and the devil ghost thing would go between people?

Is that a thing?

I feel like that's a thing.

It is nearly random, although the I'm At Home-er does statistically end up in the aisle more often than most, so keep a weather eye out.

This person is also difficult to identify because you can sometimes see it coming, and sometimes it is a complete surprise.

But, let us define it first.  The Awkward Aisler is someone who causes undue discomfort to other persons on the airplane, either by accident or through ignorance.

For instance, I enjoy the aisle seat.  I like knowing I can get up and move around.  Since I can't sleep and have some issues with my legs, I am being considerate so I don't have to wake people up when I feel the need to get up and move.  It is a fair consideration I feel.  I would prefer the window, but the lower headroom and the having to climb over people is simply too large a detriment.

Aisle, I choose you!

But this choice came with some unwelcome surprises.  First of all, my shoulder and elbows have been battered and bashed by the beverage and food cart more times than I would like to admit.

I won't complain about that cart, however.  It is full of food and drinks, no matter how disgusting they have been known to be.  I mean, there is a reason the pilot and co-pilot have to eat one of the different meals...in case one type of meal is poisoned they both won't be unable to fly.

Comforting, don't ya think?

But what I am referring to is the person that gets up and has to stop because the beverage cart is in the way.  That awkward stand where they can only inch forward one step at a time, or be a real pest and have the poor steward/stewardess roll all the way to the end, only to have to do the same thing on their return trip.

Now, this isn't a surprise.  It isn't like the beverage cart fell from the ceiling like those useless masks.  It isn't as if the aisle is a complicated labyrinth where carts come into and out of existence.

It is a goddamn aisle.  It is long and straight.

Hehe.

A few things about the awkward stand:

1 - If you find yourself in this position, know your crotch is at everyone else's eye level.  Seriously watch where you point that thing.

2 - Everyone is staring at you and wondering the same exact thing: Why did this idiot get up?  They can see the cart is right there.

3 - If you lean on an adjacent chair, know you will disturb the hell out of the person sitting in it.  The hinges were made in the first World War and easily stretch under the smallest of strain.  Just don't.

So here you are, leaning awkwardly on someone's headrest, your arm only mere inches from their head, everyone is staring at you, and your crotch is the only way most people could identify you in a police line up.

This is the Awkward Aisler.  It can strike anyone, but there is a certain person who is pre-disposed to become this sort of air traveler.

It is someone that can't identify the uncomfortable spot they have put nearby passengers in, because they are too busy humming "Mmmbop" in their heads.

In my many flights to many places all over the world, I have come to an unfortunate conclusion.  While I am not this an Awkward Aisler, for instance I can hold it if I need to use the restroom...because I am a damn adult, and generally speaking I only lean on my own vacant chair if I need to stand.  The unfortunate realization I have had, however, is some innocent people are somehow more prone to be attacked by the Awkward Aisler.

For instance, in my last flight we were in the air for one hour and 15 minutes.  With such a short flight, most reasonable people would have used the restroom before they got on the plane.  However, that thought must have blown straight through the ears of a majority of the flight roster as I was seated and no less than 7 Awkward Aislers were stuck in the aisle within arms reach of me during that trip.  4 of them used my chair for a leaning device.

That is an amazing coincidence, or I have emit some sort of pheromone that attracts eye-leve crotches.

I would wear a horned viking helmet to deter this sort of behavior, but the airlines tend to frown on that.

I will leave you with this as I prepare for a 20 hour flight in a few days, I don't know how you can protect yourself, but being aware is knowing, and knowing is at least one-third of the battle.

I also found this picture in my Google Image search for today's...piece?  It is wholly unrelated but still is awesome and funny and I thought I would like to show it to you.

Don't forget to check out my YouTube Channel and catch up on all the awesome I am up to!  Thanks SO much for reading!  Let me know what you think with a comment!

There are two types of people in this world. LOLP's vs. HAHAP's 6/15/2015

The last few blogs have been more serious topics, but today I want to talk about something even more important.

THE PREMISE

So let's get right to it.  What I want to discuss today is:

The people who say: "there are only two 

types of people in this world..."

A lot of people do just that with a lot different qualifiers:

People who:

...like Hamburger or like Cheeseburger

...Eat pizza with their hands or Eat pizza with a knife and fork

...drink tea or drink coffee

...like Pepsi or like Coke

...like Mac or like PC

...like Beer or like liquor

But there is something flawed with these sorts of blanket statements:

They are way too specific.  They don't allow for the basic issue that there is often a very grey area that should be addressed.  For instance, all of these people have something very much in common - and that under very simple circumstances, someone could easily see the correctness in the other's preferred choice.

Here, allow me to edit the previous list for correctness to demonstrate:

Hamburger or Cheeseburger ?

EAT THE BURGER YOU LUCKY PRICK

Eat pizza with your hands or Eat pizza with a knife and fork?

EAT THE PIZZA YOU LUCKY PRICK

Drink tea or drink coffee?

DRINK THE HOT LIQUID YOU LUCKY PRICK

Like Pepsi or like Coke

DRINK THE SUGAR FLUID YOU LUCKY PRICK

Like Mac or like PC

PC people

Like Beer or like liquor

GIVE IT ALL TO ME FIRST AND THEN DRINK WHAT I CAN'T PHYSICALLY CONSUME YOU LUCKY PRICK

There is also something else I think you should know about people who say these things:

They don't understand the world they live in.  With so many things there are grey areas.  These previous statements are FULL of them!

I know you know I am right.  And I appreciate that. But when you really look at how these sayings break down - they are exclusive and they don't really adequately cover the ENTIRE spectrum of people.

Coke or Pepsi?

I like Coke for mixed drinks and Pepsi when I need a kick.  Truth be told, I really don't like either.

Hamburger or Cheeseburger?

Depends on the toppings.  With lots of toppings the cheese kind of gets lost and doesn't work as well.

Tea or Coffee?

Depends on how awake I am. I usually drink tea but I love a good coffee.

Pizza with your hands or a knife and fork?

Ever have legit deep dish pizza?  Eating with your hands is a mistake. Or when you get 70 toppings and the structural support applied by the crust isn't adequate for vertical displacement.

Mac people or PC people?

While I am not a Mac fan, I do own an iPod.  Depends on what you need from your platform.

Beer or liquor?

Hahaha. Both.  Everyone is both with the right selection.  Don't be a child.

So who, I can hear you ask yourself, who really knows what types of people there are in this world?

Me.

It's me.  I know.

So before I drop this mental nuclear warhead upon you - let me preface with this: there are many types of these people, but their fundamental "self" of each is consistent.

The two types of people in this world are......

People who text "haha" and 

people who text "lol"**

**(Of course, lol meaning Laugh Out Loud)

Look at yourself.  You know immediately which one you are.  You don't cross lines - if you do it is usually out of some ironic attempt to make fun of the other one.

So which are you?

Go on.  Be honest.

I took a long look at myself and now have a goal system in place to get where I want to be.

PART 1: THE HAHAPS

Let us start with the "haha" people.

We need to examine this creature.

The general belief of most "haha people" - let us call them the HAHAPS - is the feeling that typing "lol" is a childish act.

I can hear their noses raise in the air a little bit when confronted by a "lol person" and they are forced to deal with their simplistic and juvenile abbreviations.

Not today, thank you very much.

There are many, MANY branches off the HAHAP tree.  The most common I feel would be the hahaP, (the sub-group in which I have unfortunately have found myself)

These people not only feel, (yet often deny) a moral superiority in their HAHAP-ness that transcends into the message itself - they still do fall under the umbrella of the HAHAP - but they want you to know they are being sarcastic and superior.  It is this "thing" they attach to the end of a message to make whatever screwed up and most likely sarcastic thing seem less horrible than it probably was.

Example:

You can almost feel the sarcasm dripping from the hahaP.

So is there any more variance within the HAHAP camp?

Yes there are.

Now this gets a little complicated.  First of all, not all HAHAPS are completely smug about it - but they still think the "lol people" are a bit, well, silly.

"Why would I say "lol"? That isn't what a laugh sounds like.  I say "haha" so why type "lol"? 

...or something similar.  However, they are a branch of the same tree - they are morally above the "lol people".

So how to identify the next branch of HAHAP?

They are the ones that honestly mean the HAHAP nature of their text.  

But how do we tell them apart?  How can you differentiate between a hahaP and one which is more honest?

The addition of this one symbol, and all of a sudden the hahaP turns into a haha!P or even a possible HAHA!P.  

Some people fee if they are happy enough for an exclamation point, they are happy enough for all caps.

It is simply amazing what sort of difference this one little exclamation point can make.

Let me demonstrate:

Person 1: Knock Knock.

Person 2: Who's there?

Person 1: Daisy.

Person 2: Daisy who?

Person 1: DAISY ME ROLLIN', THEY HATIN'

Person 2: haha

WOW.  TALK ABOUT A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR PERSON 1'S FEELINGS!  That implies Person 2 not only didn't find that amazing joke funny, but they want you to know they also hate you.  The person sending the joke will go away feeling rejected and unappreciated.  The HAHAPSer will set their phone down and forget the whole thing happened.

Let us assume Person 1 has another friend and they decide to try another joke to get that validation...

Person 1: Knock Knock

Person 2:Who's there?

Person 1: Cash.

Person 2: Cash who?

Person 1: No thanks, I don't like cashews. I would rather have a peanut.

Person 2: haha!

See the difference? That one little ! made all the difference!  The sender gets validation their joke was good, and the person sending it sounds as if they appreciated the joke.  Everyone wins in this scenario!  Essentially, the few milliseconds it takes to add a ! to the end of your "haha" changes everything about how it is received.

Look at this example - he HAHAPed but clearly he did not react publicly to the previous statement:

There is a third class of HAHAPS also.

This one is one step away from being a LOLP.  They are walking the line where it begins to blur.  However, at the core, they still believe their HAHAP-ness is a superior form - though I think it is more for the person's benefit on the receiving end of the response.

These are the HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!P.

A haha is too sarcastic

A haha! is okay, but it doesn't adequately advertise their specific joy.

Even the delightful HAHA!P 

These people want you to know, in no uncertain terms, how amazingly fucking joyful they are to be there, at that moment, responding to you.

There is nothing wrong with this unless applied too liberally, but if you get this in response you know you have an energetic HAHAPSer on the other end of the line who is just so happy to be there.

An example:

See?  Even though they didn't get the joke, they wanted the other person to really know just how damn happy they were to be a part of all this hilarity.

Now, you can sometimes find a HAHAHAHAHAPS!er that doesn't use an exclamation point, but their responses seem to fall into just a hahaP response of the original form of "haha".  It loses something and sort of erodes back into the base form.  It is almost as if they are trying too hard to mean it, but clearly don't.

There is also the variant you may find, an occasional BAHAHAPSer, for instance.

The "bahahaha"ers do think what you say is funny - the B at the beginning lets the receiver know that what they said was funny enough for a haha! but they also want you to know that it was not something that made them bubble over with excitement.

When someone goes "bahahaha!" in real life it is a surprise and unforced laugh, and this would be the equivalent.  Not a huge laugh, not a sarcastic laugh, but an honest laugh.

It is a good mix.  Since most of us are BAHAPS people - I just don't think we know it.  We often do think what we got in that text was funny.  We want the other person to know we thought it was funny, but the message was not funny enough for a HAHA!P response and certainly not a HAHAHAHAHAHAPS! response.

It is a good, solid response that leaves everyone happy.  Try it out, you may like it.

Now...the other side of the oh-so-defined line:

PART 2:  THE LOLPS

Okay, so we have covered one half of my stellar argument.

It is time to wander into the veritable Toon Town that is the land of the "lol people" - who we will call LOLPS as a group.

The LOLP is a more interesting creature than first glance would assume.

We will cover the majority of the LOLP population, and then discuss some of the branches the LOLP has taken in its evolution.

The main body of the LOLP population are essentially bouncy pre- teen and actual-teen teenagers - and terrifyingly enough - and young twenty-somethings.  These people grew up in a text generation that had already gotten out of infancy and was finding itself in the world. 

Unlike the HAHAPS who seem to remember a time before "LOL" even existed - and still cling to that shard of humanity they may never get back - the LOLP doesn't recognize a world where people didn't Laugh Out Loud to everything.

Everything.

They don't see "LOL" as anything ridiculous - it was there before they got there so it already existed as a part of the texting lexicon.  They use "LOL" as a funny reponse that covers all bases - it is a way they express their lack of responsibility and how the world is such a goofy place.  When you are a kid and don't have many things of your own to really look after, it is a "LOL" kind of world, ya know?

Oh, Tami broke up with Joshua and he was already dating Tina?

And while this major group is slowly aging and getting into and out of college, I feel the LOLP will never be a breed.  New LOLPers arrive every second, but that doesn't not make one a LOLP for life, it seems to be something of a phase for most people.

But texting LOL seems to be a way to just demonstrate how fancy and free you are.

One interesting fact: the addition of a ! to the end of a LOL does not affect its degree of LOLP.

However, when you get a bit older and you have a sick kid at home and your job is tearing you to pieces and your personal life hasn't existed in a decade - maybe your parents live in your guest room and your spouse is sleeping with their boss...you're probably not a LOLP anymore.  Those days are over.

So the LOLP can take several forms, much as the HAHAP.  The first I want to discuss is the lolP. 

These people use the lol as place holders - lol's for the sake of lol's.  A more focused lolP will use lol's that simply imply that what they or you are saying is funny, but they don't care enough to make a valid attempt at writing it this way.  

It has a darker side as well, where it can be thrown in just so people know you are serious...but you don't want to appear to be.

The essential lolP and LOLP also really loves emojii's, the little smileys - but is a specific breed we call LOLP+e.  They will often try to put several of these adorable emojii's together in funny scenes in order to try to get the other person to LOLP as well, and perhaps even respond with a LOLP+e of their own.  They are a branch all their own, because their LOLP+e is an attempt to get the other person to respond in kind.

Now, something interesting has happened in the LOLP camp.  It seems that there is a timeline of texting that goes a little something like this:

0 - 15 years old

Start with LOLP and slowly begin experimentation with alternate LOLP sub-groups like the lolP and LOLP+e 

15 - 20 years old

Slowly start to fade from LOLP into lolP.  LOLP+e is not very common. HAHAP and HAHA!P tendencies begin to surface.    

20 - 30 years old

LOLP is completely gone. lolP on occasion as a throwback to a happier time. They now are almost exclusively HAHAP people with a few advanced members becoming the beloved BAHAHAP

30 - 45 years old

Almost exclusively hahaP with the occasional HAHAP or even the now more rare HAHA!P.

45 + years old

This is where things get interesting...

The 45+ crowd grew up in a time before texting was really "a thing".  They essentially avoided it at first since most of their communication was the old way - voice calls, snail mail, etc.  They gave into email eventually, sure, but still kind of resisted texting as it was impersonal.

The problem arose when their kids grew up in an exclusively text era.  Their kids didn't know how or why anyone would communicate consistently with voice calls, so they had to learn how to text to better be in touch with their children.

This is noble to be sure, but a closer look reveals the interesting twist:

The people that taught the 45+ crowd to text?

They were the LOLPers.

So the cycle nearly ends itself where it started, with one caveat:

Text-speak is like a different language.  So when the 45+ crowd tries to be the lolP or LOLP their kid tried to teach them to be, you get a misuse of the word and concept in general. 

They do not evolve into subgroups, but use it as a standard communication candle, rarely varying the lol to anything other than a LOL if they happen to figure out the caps lock on their phone.

For example:                             

I personally used to get annoyed when my mother would demonstrate her LOLPness.  My sister taught her to text, and use to be one of my life's big regrets.

However, I love my mother so I don't get worked up about it.  I reach across from my HAHAP section of the world into the LOLP aisle and gladly take her hand on the way to wherever the conversation may be going.

Not for my friend Steve though.

Fuck him.

Stupid LOLP.

Where it gets even more interesting is when you look at the timeline and see it as a fluid creature, with people morphing into one region from another depending on their life at the time.  One other factor is the 45+ years old group is shrinking.  As all of the other age ranges get older, they won't need the young LOLP to teach them how because they, too, grew up in the era of text.  Will that void be full of HAHAP with its varied sub-groups like the sarcastic hahaP or the over-enthusiastic HAHAHA!P?  Or will the new older generation switch to LOLP as a way to seem cool and to stay "in touch" with their kids?

It is all very exciting to watch it unfold.

That is essentially my theory on the two types of people in this world.  Yes, there is a variance within each group, and people may actually change sides, but in today's text-to-live world, you are one of the other.

Let us see the culmination of all of this analysis and see what happens when a LOLP and a HAHAP interact:

Do you see?

Hopefully this very necessary lesson has opened your eyes to perhaps your own analysis at least.

And yes, I have entirely too much time to think about this stuff.

Thank you all SO much for reading!  This is the part of the blog where I ask you to go on and visit my YouTube page to see the fun I have been making over there.  I know it doesn't seem like much, but every view, like, and comment means a lot!

Here is my latest video!

My Opinions on Female Characters - Part 2: Small roles for the Big Screen 6/8/2015

Now for more of my in-depth analysis of the ladies...

So last week I complained talked about my opinions on how I see women in gaming and how developers could make a few easy changes to help female players have the same sort of experience male gamers have almost exclusively had for years.

Add some female characters to your game if you're not going to invest us in the main character.  This allows people to build the connection you didn't provide, (doesn't mean your game is bad - not every game needs a story) and get more enjoyment out of the game.

BAM.

Pay me.

But this week I want to say a little about how I see and interpret the female character not in video games, but on the big screen.

I have it in two parts.

PART #1

There has always been an opinion in my head about females in movies, but I never took the time to really flesh out the details.  But it was like when you have the nagging feeling something is out of place but you don't know what it is...then you just say "screw it" and grab a beer or something.

But the recent announcement of the "All-Female Cast" in the remake of Ghostbusters actually made me upset.

I can write a book about how I feel about remakes and reboots and how Hollywood is slapping names of good, old movies onto crappy scripts just to grab the cash provided by the kids who saw and loved the movies in the 80's and 90's and are now old enough to have good jobs and pay to see the steaming pile you said was a favorite memory but in reality was a cruel and inhumane joke of an experience you scum.

...

Well maybe I don't need a whole book after all.

But the reason the remake of Ghostbusters made me actually upset wasn't just the remake itself.  I admit, I am sick and tired of Hollywood going through the filing cabinet of my good movie memories and finding a way to monetize them, but that is a different blog.

The reasons it made me upset were numerous - one being the treatment of remakes in general recently - but another reason, and a big one, was the "All-Female Cast" part of it.

I was actually embarrassed by this feeling.  I didn't know why, but it really rubbed me the wrong way they would make it with an "All-Female Cast".

When I spoke with my friend Tashy at great length about the remake I didn't mention it.  I purposefully avoided telling her the "All-Female Cast" bit really didn't sit well with me at all.  I had just assumed it was me being a stupid guy who didn't think girls could pull off the remake.

I was honestly pretty taken aback by my aversion to the idea of it all.

But, as is something I have yet to learn and master, it takes me time to rationalize some things.  As much as I would like to believe I am a logical and rational person, when my emotions get stirred up I react in a way that isn't either of those things.

And the Ghostbusters remake, "All-Female Cast" aside, really annoyed me.

But time...time was all I needed.

Eventually, after the initial dust had settled and after some more talking about it with myself and with Tashy I began to realize what was the real problem.

I don't have a problem with movies that star females.  I loved Thelma and Louise.  I think Ripley is what made the Alien franchise the over-the-top success it is.

Hell, I even saw and liked Fried Green Tomatoes enough to buy the movie.

So the "All-Female Cast" thing had to stir my ire in another way...

...in a way that didn't have so much to do with the fact I think Melissa McCarthy is one of the most obnoxious and unwatchable people in Hollywood...

...which she is...

...seriously she will ruin everything ever...

...but back to the story about how Melissa McCarthy just does not make me laugh or think or feel anything but a need to change the channel...

...wait not that story...the one where I was about to tell you my problem with the "All-Female Cast"...

So here we go.  This is what I have come up with.

First of all, I definitely feel 100% that redoing Ghostbusters is a mistake.  It won't do anything to brighten what is an amazing reputation and tradition - the best we can hope for is it not to tarnish that reputation.  Just like how Indiana Jones 4 was a wretched and vile thing, it didn't harm the trilogy's solid,loved and cherished reputation.  This was clearly an attempt at snatching cash from people and drowning us in merchandising.

They could do Ghostbusters with another "All-Male Cast" and I would feel the same way.

But by making it, and relying so HARD on the fact it is an "All-Female Cast" demonstrates they don't have anything but the gimmick to work with in the first place.  They are using the "All-Female Cast" as the big announcement.  You know what I haven't heard?

The plot.

The storyline.

Anything else.

I had to search Google for 3 pages before I found anything that had a plot that didn't involve the word "rumors" attached at the very start.

And no, Channing Tatum will not be doing an "All-Male Cast" remake of Ghostbusters.  If he does I will burn this place to the ground.

Do you think they are not publishing the plot as a kind of blind hype build up to the big day?  Do you think they are being protective of the plot so other movie companies don't steal their thunder?  Is there something in the plot - some twist maybe - that will simply blow our minds?

Get the hell out of here.  There is zero chance any of that is true.

So what this means to me is one very probable thing:

They made the decision to make the movie without having a good story or script.

So without a decent script, what can be done to stir up excitement for the new movie?

Well, let's make it an "All-Female Cast" and then we will develop a script or something as we go.

Doesn't matter, people will see it anyway.

What this means is the females being cast in this movie have almost no chance of success.  The original team in the 80's had freedom and a great deal of that movie is ad libbed.  That isn't going to happen here.  I think Kristin Wiig is hilarious.  But I don't see her being able to play off the other people they cast.  On top of that, Hollywood doesn't really allow the whole "spontaneous" thing anymore.  Maybe a scene or a line, sure.  But those days are mostly long gone.

So here are 3 ladies and Melissa McCarthy that have been plucked to do a movie that doesn't have any sort of story or real, legitimate chance to be successful in the theaters.  They have been selected to front a movie they made just to make before someone else scooped up the franchise rights or all the original cast passed away.

I honestly don't think the movie has a real shot, and these three poor women and Melissa McCarthy have been placed dead into the line of fire.

One thing I do know the movie has - is a legion of very, VERY passionate fans of the original who actually are affected by this whole scenario.  They love the movie - I love the movie - and I have very fond memories of watching it back in the 80's, and from when I watched it last week.

But that is where it should stay.  I miss my grandmother, she was a smart, witty, and funny woman. I can assure you I would be quite upset if someone decided to remake her with an "All Male Cast" that is not smart, witty, or anything other than fart jokes, physical comedy and CGI lighting effects.

Calling it "My Grandmother" does not make it as good as the original without a lot of work.

Weird analogy, I know.

Can you spot the impostor?

Women - just by being women - are being used as tools to sell movie tickets.

No shit, right?

But if you think about it, it actually makes a positive feedback loop that exacerbates the situation.

Think about it this way:

If you use an "All-Female Cast" to sell a crap movie, it makes this movie with an "All-Female Cast" look like crap.  This does not inspire confidence that females can carry a movie without it looking like crap, and keeps them stuck as these crap characters far from playing many of the roles they have every right to be playing.

These movies don't do women in Hollywood any favors.

The "All-Female Cast" Ghostbusters movie will probably make money.  What does this do?  It gives other people in Hollywood permission to just slap an "All-Female Cast" onto a movie regardless of the script and it will make money.  This, of course, feeds into these movies being crap, and inspiring less actual content being offered to what could be a well-written movie starring an "All-Female Cast".


A positive feedback loop.

When your story or script is good enough you don't have to even mention the "All-Female Cast"...that is when it is good enough to film.

I am not suggesting any "All-Female Cast" movie is going to be awful.  I am saying this one will be, and they took an idea and shoehorned a gender into it because hey, isn't that wacky and isn't this a twist?

I can't wait for the "All-Male Cast" Thelma and Louise.

I may even pre-order tickets for the "All Male Cast" of Sex in the City.

No.  

I refuse.

I refuse because those would be crap movies.

So I am upset by this movie not because of the "All Female Cast" but because of what it represents.

You know what would be awesome?

Why not remake Ghostbusters with a male and female cast?

I bet if they made a mixed-gender Ghostbusters I wouldn't need 3 pages of Google to find something actually real about the plot after wading through a sea of "Mixed Gender Cast" titled articles, links and pages.

Because it would have a plot to read about.

To try to wrap up that meandering and twisting thought process, I will say this to sum up my point:

Slapping an "All Female Cast" on Ghostbusters demonstrates some of Hollywood has a definite design and framework for a lot of female characters on the Big Screen.  Including "All-Female Casts" as the only hype for a movie should not be a gimmick to sell tickets, and neither should "All-Male Cast".

But you don't see "All-Male Cast" being a used as a remake gimmick, do you?

The reason?

Because Hollywood doesn't think "All-Male Casts" are gimmicks.

Hollywood does think "All-Female Casts" are.

POINT #2

Hollywood objectifies women.

No kidding.

It puts beautiful women into movies.

Unfortunately, beautiful women, by definition, are not beautiful actresses.

In fact, some beautiful women are quite awful.

In fact again, some women who are not beautiful are wonderful actresses.

This is how it works.

But sex sells.

HEYOOOOOO!

Putting in the most beautiful person who shows up to casting won't do any favors to her character, your movie, or how women are perceived as a whole.

I am by NO means saying attractive women cannot act.  Charlize Theron is, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful actresses in the business...and she can act for miles and miles and miles.

So how can we have an Owen Wilson be considered a sex symbol?  The guy looks like someone stole his nose and he replaced it with a painted dill pickle.

Liam Neeson is not exactly the definition of Greek God, but he has a massive following of people who consider him sexy.

But Owen can act.

Liam can act.

Why don't we get that same treatment for females?

I suppose the answer is this:

It is much easier to throw a heavy-chested body into the female role than actually write some goddamn character development I suppose.

However, I have noticed that the pendulum has swung while we weren't looking.

Channing Tatum, by definition, must take his shirt off in every movie at least three times.

Channing has a strong jawline and a great physique.

But he can't act for shit.

Colin Ferrell is a big name actor.

He has a good face and an Irish accent.

But he is a marginal actor, at best.

So this point doesn't necessarily only apply to women.  But it would be hard to disagree that in a lot of movies that could be led by a female, they get a big name male and tack on some eye candy female to follow him around trying to remember her 6 fucking lines.

Once again it shows Hollywood doesn't get it.  They are living in a world where half of its customers are women.  And they still haven't figured out that if they would just treat the genders with a little equality they would make even more money.

Every now and then they do it right and you get a character like Ripley in Alien, Princess Leia in Star Wars, Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany's, Emily Blunt in Edge of Tomorrow, or even Marge the Police Chief in the frickin' Fargo movie.

But there should be more.

It's over, Hollywood.  People are changing.  Yes, you can still slap some eye candy on the screen - male and female alike - and it will sell tickets.

I will even watch some of these and likely enjoy them!  No one is telling you you can't make that kind of stuff anymore!

But it's time.  

The world is ready.

Females can fight this world's wars.

Females can run this world's companies.

Females can fix and drive the fastest cars in the world and compete every week.

So why can't they get a share of this world's great movie characters?  

It isn't like we will run out of them - you can just make more!

Thank you all SO much for reading through this blog!  I try to make sense of a lot of ideas and thoughts in my head, and I really don't know how successful I am at anything of the sort.

I appreciate you taking the time to read, and I hope you enjoyed it!  Always feel free to comment right below and let me know what you think.

I also want to say thank you to those of you that made your way over to my YouTube Channel!  I just hit 50 subscribers and am really, really enjoying myself!  If you haven't stopped by yet, maybe you could have a look?  Click the like button or subscribe if you want to see more!

Thank you!