This is a weird optical illusion — take a look at the two faces below. Then squint your eyes and look again.

(via TDW)

Hmmm, is there any reason that most of us couldn’t do most of our work with a laptop and a cell phone? It’s telecommuting, Kyle. And before you say “work from home” I’m going to stop you right there and say “work from the bar.”

And if you’re not convinced, then perhaps this amateur YouTube ad, which riffs on the Old Spice “I’m on a horse” commercials, will convince you:

Man, can I go to a bar with jalepeno ketchup and skeeball?

So I was at the gym earlier today, and they have TVs on the treadmills, but the TV on my treadmill had a very limited set of non-static channels, so I ended up watching professional darts.

I think darts is kind of where bowling was, maybe a decade ago, except crossed with poker. There are some big-money tournaments, and some large crowds, but the crowd I was watching seemed dominated by trashy-looking girls with gigantic plastic cups of beer.

And the darts players looked like they had stepped out of stereotypical central casting. Burly men with tattoos and greasy slicked-back hair dominated, and the open-chested bowling shirt seemed like it was a uniform.

Then, there was this guy: Simon Whitlock. His hair was so astonishing that I actually called Amy over from the stretching room to see it.

An Aussie, apparently Whitlock is a bit of a darts superstar. Here’s a video that recaps a recent, epic championship battle between him and Phil Taylor. Whitlock lost, but check out the hair (he’s the guy in the black and yellow):

See what I mean?

No disrespect intended, but it’s like darts is this sub-culture that is developing an odd fashion sense completely removed from the rest of the world.

There are a disturbing number of clips like this floating around the internet, where it appears to show police officers responding to the merest hints of provocation, with excessive force. (See also: the case of Peter Watts. To cleanse your palate, see how the Love Police talk down some jumpy cops in the UK, who don’t really understand their own terror laws.)

Normally, I don’t post those types of videos here — I am interested, concerned, etc, but I see them as outside the scope of this blog. There are loads of activists who can make their civil liberties points better and more ably than I. And I support them.

This video, though, I’ll post. And it’s because, to my utter surprise, I appear to be involved.

Yikes! Sure looks like a clear-cut case of overdoing it to me. Of course, as any police apologists will quickly say, I don’t know the context. And you’re right, I don’t. But I do know that all six people who were arrested were later released without charge.

And how do I know that?

Well, let’s go to the Canadian Press story, as carried in the Toronto Star:

Police spokesman Sgt. Grant Hamilton says officers responded to a fight involving eight males early Sunday morning. He says when police arrived on the scene, they found one man being kicked in the head and ended up taking six others into custody. …

Hamilton says the man who was kicked in the head was taken to hospital but has since been released and is not co-operating with police. The six men who were taken into custody were released without charges.

Whoa. It’s a po-mo moment.

To be honest, I’ve Googled myself before, so it wasn’t a total surprise that there was a Grant Hamilton, police officer out there (there’s even a picture of him in this CBC story, for example). But I’ve never bumped up against him like that, just randomly.

There’s yet another Grant Hamilton, too, who I’ve mentioned on this blog before, and who emailed me a little while ago, saying that when I blog about Polaroid (he’s an artist — and a good one — and Polaroid is his medium of choice) the Google alerts that pop up contain “his” name and it’s briefly mystifying. (We had a nice email exchange, but I don’t think we’re related in any way.)

Now that I’ve randomly stumbled against my own “doppelnamer,” I think I understand the dissociative feeling he must experience. And will, again, when this post pops up. Sorry, Grant.

You are looking at a “standing pee” aid for women, so they can be as free as a man, when it comes to voiding their bladders. From the description of a folded-up paper cone, I suspect it’s something like peeing into a coffee filter. But from the very lengthy (and glowing) review I just read on Salon, it works like a charm:

I am not a scientist. I have absolutely no clue how a mere paper product can handle a full stream of lady pee and maintain its integrity, and I don’t care. I would refer skeptics to paper towel commercials depicting a towel completely soaked, yet still able to hold various objects. If we can put a man on the moon, we surely can allow women to pee standing up. All I know is these babies work, and I love them. They are the best thing to happen to vaginas since beltless pads.

Yes, the rest of the review is as over-the-top in its language. You can buy them on Amazon, but they’re pricey. The reviewer makes mention of DIY solutions, involving construction paper and tape, but I’m not sure how well that would work. Still, if you’re hard up for a crafty way to spend a Saturday afternoon….

The Internet is the king of Infotainment. And the Lord of Lists. And those two titles are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Why would they be?

One of my current favourite lists (and it is a constantly evolving list) is one I found over at Weird Worm: The 5 Weirdest Things People Have Fallen in Love With. This isn’t the kind of “wow, I love this hamburger” kind of love. This is the “I want to marry this inanimate object” kind of love. You know, the creepy kind.

In the traditional count-down manner, here is Weird Worm’s list:

5. A robot

4. The Eiffel Tower

3. A dolphin

2. A roller coaster

1. The Berlin Wall

I can’t say whether these “great loves” were placed in any particular order or not, but I suspect not. On the other hand, I would be hard pressed to organinze these in any order of oddity.

Now, before I get accused of being a closed-minded ass, let me assert that I am all for the right of people to marry whoever they want (within reason — I mean, come on, kids are off limits), but I have trouble with the idea of people marrying outside of the species or to, say, a national landmark.

Because the Internet is a common source of half-truths, falsifications, exaggerations and out-and-out lies, I thought I should do a little more digging on each of these stories. Here is a summary of my findings:

1. Eija-Riitta Berliner-Mauer married Berlin Wall. STATUS: FACT

Berliner-Mauer describes herself as objectum-sexual. She runs a website devoted to herself and her husband — the Berlin Wall. Granted, it hasn’t been updated in a couple of years, but that seems like a minor point.

2. Amy Wolfe married a roller coaster. STATUS: FACT

Attracted to her husband “sexually and mentally,” Wolfe fell in love with the ride — 1001 Nachts — when she was 13. And although they can’t always be together, she at least has pictures of him to “satisfy herself at home.”

3. Sharon Tendler married a dolphin. STATUS: FACT

In another case of love at first sight, Tendler knew the Israeli dolphin for 15 years before proposing. Often a long-distance relationship (Tendler lives in Britain), she makes the trip on a regular basis to see her spouse. (click link for a video of the ceremony).

4. Erika La Tour Eiffel married the Eiffel Tower. STATUS: FACT

Her name change notwithstanding, Erika (a San Francisco resident), married the landmark in 2008. Let’s hope the tower isn’t the jealous type, as Erika “claims to have a physical relationship with a piece of fence she keeps in her bedroom.”

5. Zoltan marries a robot. STATUS: FACT

No longer are there instructions for making your own robot girlfriend on his website, but you can read all about the love of his life in this fairly extensive article and interview.

Observation: four women, one man. Only the man has chosen to remain anonymous — but mostly at the request of his parents.

Shocker.

I was speechless when I read this account in Discover about an accidental pregnancy that occurred when a girl gave her boyfriend a blowjob.

The thing is, her ex-boyfriend caught them in the act. And there was some stabbing. And, apparently, a hole was made in both the stomach and the uterus, allowing a fluke pregnancy.

How do they know that it had to be the stabbing? Well, when she came to the hospital nine months later, complaining of abdominal pain, this is what they found:

Abdominal examination revealed a term pregnancy with a cephalic fetal presentation. The uterus was contracting regularly and the fetal heart was heard. Inspection of the vulva showed no vagina, only a shallow skin dimple was present below the external urethral meatus and between the labia minora. An emergency lower segment caesarean section was performed under spinal anaesthesia and a live male infant weighing 2800 g was born. (emphasis mine)

Apparently, everyone has reconciled themselves to the situation.

But I’m surprised that evangelicals haven’t seized on it.

Based on this, I’d wager that French television in the 70s filled the same North American cultural niche as Japanese television does today.

Thanks Colin!

Lady Gaga has been named ‘creative director’ at Polaroid?

*checks calendar* Nope, not April 1.

According to a statement on her website:

“I am so proud to announce my new partnership with Polaroid as the creative director and inventor of specialty projects,” said Lady Gaga. “The Haus of Gaga has been developing prototypes in the vein of fashion/technology/photography innovation-blending the iconic history of Polaroid and instant film with the digital era-and we are excited to collaborate on these ventures with the Polaroid brand. Lifestyle, music, art, fashion: I am so excited to extend myself behind the scenes as a designer, and to as my father puts it-finally, have a real job.”

“Lady Gaga’s broad creative talents and the way she connects with her fans in her own, unique manner made her a natural choice for Polaroid,” said Stephen Miller, co-CEO of PLR IP Holdings. “Polaroid has had a special connection with its customers for years, we are delighted to be partnering with Lady Gaga to continue with that tradition and bring new and exciting products to the next generation.”

If you cut through the media-release-ese, what you get is:

Lady Gaga: Polaroid is paying me big bucks because I’m relevant and ‘today’ while they may as well be making horseshoes.

Polaroid: Our core product is so obsolete, we shut down the factory, leaving us nothing except our brand in the digital era. Lady Gaga, herself, if pretty much all brand. We see this as “hitching our wagon to a winning horse,” to use a horseshoe metaphor ourselves.

Look for cross-branded products in late 2010. Now, will they be called “Gagaroid” or “Polagag”?

When I was a child, I was fascinated by the quagga — a half-horse, half-zebra looking creature that went extinct in 1883 without people of the time even knowing it (they were confused by quagga/zebra similarity).

Now, aside from a wild project to “re-breed” the quagga from specially selected zebras, the only way to see a quagga is to visit one of the two dozen stuffed versions that exist in museums around the world.

Or, you can perhaps carve wooden toys of extinct animals, like Josh Finkle has.

It’s unclear whether this is just an art project, or whether he intends to sell them, but his versions of the quagga, the Tasmanian tiger, the pig-footed bandicoot and the Steller’s sea cow are all darn cute, and if the price was right, I’d buy ‘em.

Well, at least the quagga.

(via Coudal)

Grant came across an interesting story in The Star yesterday: Nick Waters, from Oklahoma, has decided that in order to better understand his wife — and the female psyche in general — he is going to watch 30 “chick flicks” in 30 days.

Yes, the movies (i.e. hyper realism) are going to help him better understand his wife.

From The Star:

Waters, who runs a home-based public relations business in a town of 6,000, came up with the idea in July after watching a chick flick, the title of which escapes him, with his wife, Nicci. “Somehow the conversation came up and I said, `Wouldn’t it be cool if I watched 30 chick flicks in a row to get a better understanding of women?’ And my wife said it was a great idea.”

Starting Jan. 15, Waters will watch a different movie each evening for a month. Some he’ll watch alone, others with his wife, mom and mother-in-law. They’ll discuss the movie, and Waters will write a review and post it by the next day.

I realize that this is all probably in good fun, and maybe watching movies that have no bearing on reality will help him better understand his wife, but I think playing into these kinds of gender stereotypes isn’t cute and funny so much as it is risky (for both the men and the women).

As Grant pointed out, instead of watching movies for 30 days, why doesn’t he just talk to his wife each evening? Surely that will help him understand her.

Hell, maybe this is exactly what he needs to do to “get” his wife. Everybody is different. But in general, I hope that women aren’t watching rom-coms thinking “oh, if only my life could be like that!” and I hope that men aren’t watching them thinking, “oh, is that what my wife wants?”

If you’re interested in Waters’ experiment, you can follow his reviews here, and even suggest movies to watch.

So, who is going to build the 6,000-plus new mine-resistant, ambush-protected all-terrain vehicles, or M-ATVs (seen above), that the United States military needs in Afghanistan. Is it:

a) General Dynamics?
b) Raytheon?
c) Northrop Grumman?
d) Lockheed Martin?
e) Oshkosh?

Answer after the jump:

Read more »

In this day and age, when everyone had a phone with a camera in it or a camera with a phone in it or some other digital doo-dad that includes a phone, it’s no wonder that we see all sorts of strange photos online that make us say WTF? (Except, you know, the full version.)

At WTF Photos from Old Times, there are photos from way back that have a greater WTF factor than almost anything today because they are: (1) so bloody weird and provide absolutely no context; (2) fashion and/or style has changed so much that we simply cannot wrap our heads around what we are seeing; or (3) society has just changed too much.

Take the above photo as an example. Who in their right mind today would think to take a picture of a bunch of klansmen out having fun at the county fair? (Ok, maybe some would think of it, but who would actually do it?) And photos of circus freaks simply isn’t politcally correct any more.

All in all, WTF Photos is not only a journey into the weird, but an examination of social change through the ages. (Actually, I just threw that last part in — I’m all about the strange stuff.)

Maybe some of the females out there can enlighten me, but is this a product that’s really required? I can only presume that, like day-time bras, if everyone needed this, everyone would have one, and I would already know of its existence.

On the other hand, now that I know the difficulties that face side-sleeping breasts, I can legitimately get frisky with my hands when spooning.

Here’s a site called Odds Checker that lets you compare the rates being offered by different online bookies. It’s useful, I suppose, if you’re into the online betting thing, and you want to get the best “return” on your “investment” by shopping around.

But I don’t do any sports betting — and that’s what 90% of the site is all about.

However, there’s this intriguing little link, called “Specials.” And that’s where the real action is, in my opinion. Using the menu at the top, you can bet on things like the Emmy Awards, the Booker Prize, even Big Brother or So You Think You Can Dance.

And what’s this? Other Specials? Why that’s where you can lay your money on the next reported sighting of the Virgin Mary! Or whether the first same-sex marriage in Ireland will be lesbians, gay men or two transgenders.

There’s tons more — and it’s fun just to see what kind of stuff people will bet on. I suppose it’s a useful site if you want to bet on sports, too.

(via Coudal)