December 5th, 2010


My big Christmas present this year is going to be a big screen TV. Mostly because I used to have a large television but it died four years ago exactly two weeks after Rome Girl got laid off from her job so we bought a small cheapo television and have been frustrated by it ever since. We've had a very good year businesswise so this seems like a good time to upgrade.

After searching through many, many televisions we've narrowed it down to two that fit into our budget, seem to perform reasonably well and will fit on the mantle (the only place to put a large television in our living room.

There are, however, pros and cons to both and we are not that technical so if anyone out there can share any suggestions to tilt us one way or another I'd appreciate it.

Here's the first one.

Pros: The fluidity of movement in fast images is astounding. It's Consumer Report's Best Buy for large screen televisions this year. It's anchored very strongly in its base. Panasonic is a brand we trust. Nearly all available online reviews rave about it.

Cons: Our mantle is 29 and a half centimeters long. The base is 30 centimeters long, so the front tip of the base will come slightly over the lip (though the TV is anchored in the back of the base so I think it would still be stable.) Static images appear slightly pixilated. And, it's a plasma and Rome Girl has heard that plasma screens can have problems with image burning.

There there is this one.

Pros: The static image quality is astounding. No pixilation at all. It's an LCD screen. The base is only 18 centimeters long giving us more room to maneuver it around when we need to plug wires into it.

Cons: Not a lot of reviews available. Fast moving images are not as fluid as on the Panasonic plasma. Not quite as well anchored into the base as the Panasonic. More expensive. Worried that the cat will be able to run behind it and knock it onto the floor.

Any thoughts from tech people out there?



The Flaming Continues


The studs over at the The False Rape Society hate quirkytizzy even more than they hate me!

The deal is that she tried to engage them in a dialog and suggested that a site where people routinely comment that "most rape accusations are false" might attract some actual rapists.

So, they banned her and completely redid their site to moderate their commenting system to keep the very scary Tizzy and other "feminazis" (their word, quoted extensively on the site) from making offensive comments.

Yet comments from other people like

"most rape claims are pure fiction"


"If rape is one of the worst things that can happen to a woman, and young women honestly believed drinking leads to rape, they wouldn't drink "


"ban drinking for women"


"Back in the "good old days" women were expected to be responsible for their own behavior, as well as maintaining a good reputation.

Nowdays, the sisterhood is attempting to strong arm everyone into believing women are NOT responsible for slutty behavior."


"What happens to a society that has accepted and in institutionalised the faulty and inflammatory misinformation attacks on men who are heterosexual??
answer..Over time, it will be just (homosexual males and women) who rake in the capital gains dollars, while the heterosexual underclass labor."

are all considered acceptable, non offensive comments.

Anyway, since these guys are clearly going to keep bombing this site for a while I might as well give them some fresh meat to play with.

1. While probably not the intention of your site, The False Rape Society blog certainly is part of the problem that leads to many women not reporting actual rapes. When they read on your blog that people believe that most rape accusations are false it can not help but create a culture where women assume they will not be taken seriously if they go to the cops. The fact is that women in this society are routinely told that rape is their fault in many subtle and not so subtle ways. Your site is part of that culture.

2. I note that the author of the blog itself has been very careful to not actually say himself that he thinks "most rape accusations are false" - however he has allowed a culture to be created on that site where that and similar statements are posted on a very regular basis. A blog is not simply the words of the blog writer himself, it is the sum total of the community that participates in the blog. That's true of my blog, it's true of Gawker and Jezebel and it's true of The False Rape Society as well.

3. Ok, you object to the standard theory that only 2 percent of rape accusations are false. Fine, let's assume the real number is 500 percent higher. That still means that nine out of 10 rape accusations are real.

4. One of the running themes of the blog are that blacks and Latinos are far more likely to face false rape charges then affluent white men. That's probably true. But, it's also true they are more likely to be charged with murders, muggings, robberies and burglaries they didn't commit than affluent white men. If your site was really about the institutionalized racism of the American justice system, I'd give you some props. But it isn't. The only point in signaling out rape is because it is a crime that you can make "go away" if enough people stop believing it happens. You can't do a "False Murder Society" blog because bodies have a way of still turning up. And, the dead can't suddenly come back to life and recant and say they were never murdered. But, women can be pressured into recanting, can stop reporting rapes and can be told that what happened to them was not rape, through legal and social pressure. This, I suspect, is why the word "slutty" appears on your site so very, very often.

5. To get to Tizzy's point. If I create a blog about Lindsay Lohan's tits, it's going to attract heterosexual men and homosexual women. If I make a blog about Montpellier, France, it's going to attract people who are interested in Montpellier, France. If you create a blog that is SEO keyword stuffed with the words "rape" and "false rape" it is going to attract actual rapists. That's just common sense. Now I'm not saying you don't have a right to create that blog, you certainly do. But, rapists are assholes, so if you have that site eventually someone is going to accuse your site of attracting assholes.

6. As to the ongoing accusation that I use this blog to treat women like "pieces of meat." The vast majority of the people who comment on this blog are women. Am I sometimes an asshole? You bet and they let me know it and I try to listen to them and learn from it. Do I sometimes objectify women? You bet. All heterosexual men do. But, you know what, all heterosexual women sometimes objectify men too. And all gay men sometimes objectify gay men and lesbians sometimes objectify lesbians. It's part of the mating process. Sometimes we want to talk to and listen to and share feelings with the objects of our desire. Sometimes we just want to be dirty and look at tits, or six pack abs or some dude's giant wang.

7. Now, let's get to the primary reason place where I disagree with the people on the False Rape Society blog. On this page it's made pretty clear that the site does not believe that sex that happens after "psychological coercion" is rape. I disagree. In fact, I suspect that it's actually a far more damaging version of rape. If a stranger comes up to a woman in a ski mask with a knife and forces himself upon a woman it's an awful act of rape, but she's going to blame herself far less than if she's on a date with a guy she has a crush on and he threatens to tell everyone that she's a slut if she doesn't "put out." That's going to cause real long term self doubt and psychological damage. Same thing as saying "Bitch, why did you come home with me if you weren't going to put out" or a girl being alone with guy and making out, her saying "no" when it gets to a certain point, him ignoring her and just continuing to move things forward to sex and her realizing she's suddenly alone with someone much larger than herself who could hurt her very badly if they wanted to and her deciding to simply stop fighting him so that she doesn't end up in the hospital. Those are all very, very common examples of "psychological coercion" and are all rape in my opinion. Clearly your opinion may vary, which is why you have your blog and I have mine.


Bart, the mangina who treats women like pieces of meat.