Noted Deity Says “Fuck Off” to Women in Alabama, According to Governor

Look, I’m in a shitty mood. This has been one of those days where I have to quickly drop my naivete and happy thoughts about the world. It’s dumb because I know I’m naive. I crack jokes on Twitter. (And by the way, this is far from exclusively related to this matter. Or else I would just be writing in righteous anger.) This will be short because expletives are what I’m going for. This also isn’t funny, although that hasn’t been the case for anything so far.

You know what? Fuck it. Here’s our governor saying “Fuck you” to the women of my home state. Err, excuse me, here is the governor invoking God and letting him be the one who says “Fuck you” to the women of my home state:

Speaking at an anti-choice rally, he told the attendees he couldn’t wait to sign the bill into law. “We need to remember we are dealing with human life and this is what God expects us to do,” Governor Bentley declared, according to the Associated Press. “I can assure you, if it comes to me, I will sign it.”

Here’s some people that would kindly say “Fuck you” to the TRAP bill:


Male Feminism

I had a big long piece about feminist porn planned, but I think I want to have a more introductory theme to why I am doing this whole thing. Much of this blog hasn’t been very funny or very boner mocking yet and I apologize for creating those expectations with the very name of this blog. But as you suspect, I am a male feminist. As mentioned before (and seen in photos), I am also white. For a while, I didn’t get why people view this as a contradiction. I haven’t had an experience where I felt harassed because of my views, just told directly that I need to study things much more before I place a label. This is all personal stuff, so if you are looking for a big long critique, I don’t suspect I’m going to be writing it in this column. I just want to explain who I am.

I guess it all started around high school, probably around sophomore year. As mentioned in the past, I had roughly one friend before going from private school to public school in the 10th grade. This was the best decision I’ve ever thought about since I severely doubt I would pay attention to feminism, alternate political and religious theory, and podcasts without high school. I hated the atmosphere of high school, but I enjoyed my independence. I learned how to write, going from embarrassing Xanga and MySpace blogs to writing for college newspapers and the very blog I’m writing right now.

Feminism wasn’t on my mind in high school, but I was always closer to females during those days. I don’t know what it was, but men seemed like assholes. It’s funny, I see people assert feminists as man-haters, but I probably hated men way more when I had to encounter teasing in high school. It wasn’t like The Perks of Being a Wallflower where a girl was hurling obscenities. And by the way, I think there was way more about me that was inherently sexist. I think all of my female friendships were based on desire much more than anything else. The college story is significantly less interesting because I think it’s cliche. I got new friends in college, they basically gave me a greater understanding of stupid shit I was doing, and an understanding about feminism grew from there.

I do worry that I’m not “good” at this. This is kind of a secret worry I have about everything, though. I’m generally fine with my writing, my appearance, or my point of view, but being fine somehow doesn’t feel the same as being good at something. I wrote this very blog to try to reconcile this. I am a lone male feminist in my group of male friends and sometimes there’s playful teasing about this. Unlike high school, I don’t really view this as insulting, just a response to me asserting something that people aren’t as crazy about.

By the way, I don’t think you are a sexist, non-feminist reader. If you take the time to even read this without firing a ridiculous comment, chances are you’re not off the mark. Why I made this was more just a general comment place to put some opinions that might be preaching to the choir but are worth talking about. This is why I post links on Facebook or act obnoxious.

So if you enjoy this, I’ll gladly keep typing.

That said, I will break one myth. To those who throw down the strawman argument that male feminists do what they do to get laid, well, that’s a dumb argument to begin with, really. Maybe women like being treated like people instead of sex objects? But anyway, let me state that there hasn’t been a situation where a feminist convo in my life has led to sex. And that shit is a-ok. For all the worth of intellectual thought apparent in society, there’s seemingly few examples where this feels genuine. Feminist chats feel genuine to me.

Again, sorry for being selfish here. We’ll talk about feminist porn soon.

The C-Word and Offensive Humor

I’m going to keep this brief, because truth be told, I feel I am a poor barometer for humor. Plus, here’s what you already know: there were Oscars, a 9 year old girl of color was nominated for Best Actress, a satirical website thought it satirical enough to call her a “cunt” as a commentary, it didn’t work.

(I will only use the word that one time to specify what I’m talking about and then letting you assume you know what the C-word is.)

I can’t remotely begin to unpack this situation myself, as truth be told, I’m a white male. This isn’t my fight to be offended by the use of the word. I can say, however, that smarter people have rightfully analyzed this situation. The rest of this might just turn into links on why this is more than just misfired satire. And that’s fine, because again, we need a lesson. Roxane Gay in her amazing Tumblr piece on the situation says:

This tweet was ill advised and repulsive, not just because the actress was nine, or because MacFarlane had, earlier in the evening, made a joke about her being too old for George Clooney in sixteen years, but primarily because young black women, black girls, are regularly hypersexualized. There was this additional, fraught context that someone didn’t take into consideration and probably couldn’t take into consideration because they are oblivious. They are oblivious to the context because they’ve never been around people who are familiar with it, because they’ve never been held accountable.

Read the rest of her piece, as it gets at why this hurts and why this isn’t just “whiny PC people being upset at swear words.” Then read this from the Crunk Feminist Collective:

He wasn’t nice. Some of the people who have interviewed you and are talking about you have been really disrespectful. You’ve done such a great job telling people how to say your name. It makes me mad that people still can’t get it. People think it’s funny to make fun of Black girls with names like ours. When I was little people would say my name wrong on purpose. Even now, people hear me say my name and think I’m saying something that’s more familiar to them. How folks hear “Gwen” from Moya, I will never understand.

With all of this in mind, I will say something I do feel I should comment on as a white male. More accurately, I want to comment on the commentary on offensive humor that has come out of this discussion. Shit like this irritates the fuck out of me. In attempting to “defend comedy,” it pretends that satire is about being vile. Look, we’re not all good people. I get what the intent was from the Onion tweet. But pretending that this isn’t a comment that people should be angry about because it reminds them of systemic oppression is basically mansplaining. It misses the point of why people are taught about intersectionality (the crossroads of class, race, sexuality, and gender) in college classes. (Cue “but that’s just Women’s Studies bullshit, I’m sure.”) It’s because we view black athletes as thugs but white athletes as rebels. It’s because of the Hottentot Venus. It’s because songs about asses are made by black artists and usually attached to black women.

It’s also because comedy is the biggest tightrope in the world. I respect that. Being a comic that is funny with bite is extremely difficult. That’s why a lot of comics strive for the middle of the road. But that’s what a tightrope is. We can’t all be Louis CK and knock social commentary out of the park while not caring about where the offensive line is. I mean, surely you get when someone brings up a taboo not just to shock and delivers it perfectly, right? It wasn’t the Onion tweet or Seth MacFarlane’s schtick or anything hurled (as satire or commentary) to Quvenzhané Wallis on Sunday night. It wasn’t helped by mostly white men defending the tweet without understanding the implications.

But maybe I’m just humorless, eh?

How the Douchebro-Loved UFC Booked the Most Progressive Sporting Contest in Recent Memory

I normally wait and give a catchy title to links, but I’m just going to post this link. These are the first two episodes of UFC Primetime, a series designed to sell fights for the Ultimate Fighting Championship namely because it features two wildly divergent personalities that a person would want to see punch each other in the face. Yet this is something a bit different to approach. On February 23rd, a first occurs in the UFC which is weirdly insane considering the UFC’s mainstream attitude: two women not only fight in the UFC octagon for the first time in the organization’s 20 year history but they fight in the main event.

Now, I’m not really going to talk much about the fight in relation to how successful it would be. No, I want to bring the art of these UFC Primetime programs as stand alone stories. The two women fighting in the main event are Ronda Rousey and Liz Carmouche. I don’t expect many people to know either, but if they know anyone, they know Rousey. Rousey by virtue of her Strikeforce fights and yes, because she looks conventionally attractive, has become a media darling the level of the last major fighter to break into the mainstream from women’s mixed martial arts, Gina Carano.

I got into an interesting debate on the discussion of women in sports this past weekend. Well, debate might be the wrong term. A friend asked if he was sexist for not viewing the WNBA as an interesting league. I don’t think I had a good defense. As a matter of fact, I think my language was more problematic than anything else. Unfortunately, without female athletes being placed into male athletics, it is hard to really tell. I want to assume we’re all equal, but I just don’t know. It hasn’t happened yet, and I would be worried about the chaos it will take for this to be any different. Maybe it’s a boys club in major sports.

This only makes the UFC booking this fight under their all inclusive banner all the more progressive. Even though Dana White had famously decried that he would never book women fighters, what White says and what he actually does is significantly different.

But let us discuss the stories engaged in these specials and why it becomes extremely progressive in a sporting contest. White and UFC match-maker Joe Silva have expertly cast an opponent of fascination for Rousey in Carmouche. To spoil a bit of the first episode, Carmouche is an out lesbian. This is not used in any way but to simply note her as a tough fighting folk hero for the LGBT community. Carmouche is a massive underdog in the fight itself, but the special immediately makes her into a star. It’s not to say that Rousey isn’t intriguing, as Rousey fights with a technique that is at a top level for any trained fighter, male or female. But it is to say that Carmouche is totally appealing to a market that suddenly sees a nuance to an organization that hires people like this on their payroll.

Now don’t get me wrong, before these Primetimes, this fight looked like a sole building fight for the media darling Rousey, who has appeared (among other things) in ESPN The Magazine’s body issue. But now, things are different. Liz Carmouche is a genuinely interesting person and very personable to the community she represents. I mean, the girl has a rainbow heart on her fight attire. She even calls her Twitter fandom Lizbos. Carmouche has been the most genuinely fascinating mixed martial artist (as a person, not as a fighter) since probably Forrest Griffin, and Griffin’s intrigue was only based on a slight insanity he held as well as insane books he co-wrote.

This is not to say these Primetimes aren’t still implicitly about Rousey’s stardom as well as her coming to grips with exploiting the death of her father as a means of fame. This is intriguing in its own right as well as Rousey’s admittedly sexless training process (her humor in the Real Sports clip above akin to Jennifer Lawrence). But this is why these episodes have been the best of the show’s run. Instead of merely being about two guys cutting promos, it is about two lifestyles and humanity with different mindsets. Rousey is fine with courting controversy. Carmouche is reserved, but still somehow radical. Almost makes me not want to see people punch each other in the face.

TRIGGER WARNING: Some Stupid Shit Put on Twitter on Tuesday and Also Other Things

Here’s the part where I mention what a “trigger warning” is. It is essentially when I am posting material not from myself but from other places that is inflammatory. My mean here is to let the pure dumbness of it ring out, really. I have whited out the names of the Twitter profiles involved because the nature of the platform is generally anonymous to begin with, also people love the shit out of pissing off others to a point that they get responses back. I guess people will call them strawmen because whatever. I don’t really care how you take it. I will have a nice succinct response to each tweet below the thing, though.


I’m going to admit that I’m kind of new to the actual full on stereotypes about feminists or about women in general. I think I’ve heard the cliche that women are bad drivers, but it never made much sense to me. The only accidents I remember were of my male cousin in his Mustang or whatever car of the moment he had. I want to say that my mom wrecked her Chevette once, but that might’ve actually been my dad’s doing. Also, my grandfather is an overly cautious driver who has devolved into the worst driver on the planet. My mom drives a lot. My grandma has to drive a lot. So I guess I don’t get it. Is the punchline that feminists don’t work? That they hate cars? That cars don’t have enough patchouli oil? Sexists, I need your commentary on this.


I should probably put these in a collection, so when we get to sandwich tweets, I guess we’ll talk. But mainly about comedy, since this seems to be an attempt at that.


Or maybe we’ll talk about comedy now. This is something I find particularly interesting, namely the idea that feminism and political correctness wreck the art of telling jokes. And while my defense would be the myriad of amazing comedy specials from the past five years that aren’t uber-PC but probably aren’t the type of “jokes” ole boy is talking about, this goes to a deeper layer of thought about comedy. He (and it is a he despite the blacking out of the name) seems to wish comedy was back to being like this:

And yes, the second search immediately has a YouTube comment reading about how America is a bunch of nannies now. And by the way, this isn’t to say that these comedians didn’t hold humor. Eddie Murphy’s specials are fucking hilarious. This isn’t new information. But watch that bit and try not to seriously find Eddie’s attitude there just a little bit fucked. It’s very hard to defend. I get that comedy as a form has often been about destroying the idea of decency. Andrew Dice Clay in reality at least attempts to purport to not be the biggest misogynist asshole on the planet. Eddie Murphy presumably has gay friends. Both are playing personas here. But the trouble with un-PC comedy is the simple rose-tinted idea that people can’t do this now and thus should DO THIS CONSTANTLY.

Hell, maybe comedy needs to be equaled. I’ll think about this non-PC thing further.


I always thought sandwiches were kind of shitty. Does anyone have any hypotheticals about why women live in a world with all this sandwich meat and guys who really like eating them but not making them? It’s a century old cliche about power dynamics, but it’s also kind of fucked. Is making a sandwich a feminine process in 2013? Should the sandwich artists at Which Wich or Subway or Jimmy Johns be upset because dudes don’t make sandwiches? Oh, I’m taking the hypothetical to a joke with an old premise. This is like the Red Grange of jokes against feminists, only with more deterioration and told by people much worse at football. (Sorry, Red.)


Oh, conservative stuff. By the way, did I note yet that the Violence Against Women Act was passed by the Senate today and that its only stopping point was 22 men, mainly conservatives? Also of note was that a majority of conservatives DID vote for passing, and every woman on the Senate voted for the act’s return. Just a note. By the way, this tweet was also written by a man.


This one was funny because the background was a female underwear model and the guy’s account espoused how he’s an alpha guy. It’s a very conquest nature of thinking, which reminds me of that time I read The Game by Neil Strauss for a class. It always struck me just how over the book’s length, it really felt like the guys involved were actually less interesting creatures than the beginning form before the pick-up game. Other than the gross implications, I always thought memorizing an algorithm was one of the most boring ideas to set up having sex in the history of both sexuality and memory techniques. So I guess I don’t get where men who want to present themselves as poon hounds (on a nerdy fucking form of technology with an invention that is essentially blamed for allegedly turning people into introverts) go with their lives, really. I guess masturbation’s too gross.


This is the closest to attempting variance in a joke, but the bottom part seems funnier to me for some reason. It would be awesome if this really dumb rye joke was timely in February 2008 for no reason at all.


I presume she might be making a reference to Sylvia Plath’s The Bell Jar, although the complete vagueness of the point is probably in reference to…well, I don’t know, exactly. Was there a hidden movement for female-based writing to become selfish and wreck literature? Was that why people were looking at me funny for reading the Mindy Kaling book? Or again, does she not know what she’s talking about since a shitload of great books were all about selfishness, male or female?


Ugh, I didn’t want to go into the more striking complex topic here. I have no information to give on the subject of rape fantasies. I know nothing about them, and any effort to decry or defend them should be left to people who know what the hell they’re talking about. But I do want to know these stats. I don’t know “most women” so do they believe this? (My hypothesis is no, but again, I know nothing on the matter.) Do “many think it’s true” often? Did this happen to the guy (surprise, it’s a guy, I know)? Or more accurately, do the questions even matter because it’s anti-consent bullshit? (My hypothesis is this.)

UA Stuff

I’m putting this part in italics as I do feel this is the elephant in the room for me to address this. For those who are unaware, I worked for the Crimson White for three years. I will admit if anything feels biased about my portrayal of newspapers and their process in this piece, it will be because I was involved with it. Yet I didn’t do the strenuous work like copy-editing, hard reporting, et al., so there’s also a distance as I mention this as well. Either way, keep this in mind as I write this.


“I understand your concerns. As is often the case with student newspapers and unfortunately professional newspapers as well, reporting is not as accurate as we would hope.

This opens up an e-mail sent by Judy Bonner, the current president of the University of Alabama, in response to comments and criticism behind the story ‘Consent concerns on campus‘ published February 4, 2013 in the Crimson White. While I have a lot to think about this, I will place the rest of this block quote before I respond.

The interview that The CW did with [the official] was conducted last November on an entirely different topic. As I understand it, The CW selected comments from the interview on an entirely different topic and wrote a story about rape. I have carboned Margaret Garner, associate dean for the College of Community Health Sciences. The Department of Health Education and Promotion reports to her. She can provide a more comprehensive response. But, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.”

It should be noted that Bonner’s mainly responding to people from this gross subreddit, who flocked immediately at one particular line in the piece and flooded said piece with comments and e-mails. I’ll give you a hint on the comment a Men’s Rights subreddit would get up in arms about. You’re right, it’s the one about there being no false allegations. Other than the fact that masculism (oh god, they’ve attempted to make that into a word) is extremely easy to mock, as this wonderful trolling of the (SERIOUSLY ATTEMPTED) #INeedMasculismBecause hashtag proves.

And with the idea of “masculism” in mind, jesus hell, who in the world is viciously offended by a lady who “misspoke”? Oh, right, people who freak out that men (who statistically have done the majority of proven rapes) are accused of that. It is funnier that the comments on the original piece assert the lady who said this comment to be a Marxist-Feminist or place comments against them as “hateful” as this is exactly the general feeling of quite a few men and women (feminist or not, by the way) when I posted this story to their wall.

But let’s go beyond that murkiness and back to what Bonner said and also look at this editorial, an Our View by the Crimson White posted this morning. Bonner’s tone in the e-mail, especially in the top quote, generally dismisses the Crimson White’s coverage as substandard. Let’s not forget that the Crimson White is HER college’s campus publication, the one that is using presumed ethical practices to place its stories. And even if they aren’t (which doesn’t seem to be the case with this story), I don’t know how a story about consent could not possibly be about the topic at hand. Moreover, it is paramount that an administration doesn’t suddenly put its chief student-run representative of the department of journalism under the bus. Of course, this is exactly what Dr. Bonner did. Also, it’s a bit obvious to all of you reading by this point, but it seems Dr. Bonner is obfuscating the issue here.

In college campuses, sexual assault is a genuine problem. This is not new information. Also not new information is that men get really upset about this issue, despite the fact that they do nothing to seemingly avoid it. I went with a friend to UA’s Take Back The Night, which is a national event meant to create awareness and support against sexual assault. And as much as it sucks that women still have to be considered the victims (an actually valid argument to any piece on sexual assault), it sucks even more that men never show up. There were very few men amongst that audience and there was a valid, scientific speech done by a lawyer on the legalities of sexual assault.

This issue is complex, but it isn’t that complex. Hiding the issue of sexual assault on campus doesn’t make it go away. Thus, I dearly hope The Crimson White confronts this subject using all of their means. Because this horrible shit doesn’t go away. If anything, it becomes a bigger unaddressed elephant in the room.

EDIT: I edited out a paragraph of text because I felt it didn’t contribute to the argument I was making. This flows better.

Also, another important thing. As noted by a wonderful lady on Facebook (won’t reveal her name unless she wants to take credit):

“I challenge anyone who feels anything at all about Judy Bonner’s comments contact her or her office immediately to let her know what you think. (205) 348-5103

It is unacceptable for the head of this – THIS – university to try to comb over an issue that is so obvious to us all.”

Go Home Memetic Mutation, You’re Drunk

When I get bored, I go on Facebook because I am unoriginal and so is just about everybody else. I have friends, these friends have friends, and so on. So this happens:


I don’t know if I quite understand meme usage. If a person posts a meme, do they do it because it is funny? Is it a great pun? Is it a grand sardonic statement about a problem on the planet? Does the user feel they have not posted anything on Facebook in a while? Is it peer-influenced? Can there be peer influence with anonymity on the internet?


I get fascinated by how people respond to memes as a means to express their views. I’m fascinated by this as I’m unsure if it represents a sort of lazy expression of opinion or just a picaresque way to communicate it without having to show off poor grammar skills. Either of these ideas are fine to follow in medium doses. I mean, a lot of people like cat memes!


But then this sort of laziness generates some sloppy memes. I’m going to use an (unknowing) test subject to demonstrate this, but first, let me give a lot of background. I went to grade school with this person, and I also hope and suspect he will never read this so I’ll get less generic. We rode around and I was given my first introduction to acts like Avenged Sevenfold and the Insane Clown Posse. Time passed, I went to college and he went to work. Other than the glory of “Miracles” and Gathering of the Juggalos infomercials, there isn’t much from that era that I want to remember. I evolved from 16 year old me to the current beauty parade candidate I am today.


With this (as well as past and present me in the pictures above) in your mind, I want to bring up the meme that he posted. Mind you, this is one of like 40 he’s “shared” this week, so the actual statement might be more devalued than I give it credit for:


This meme was cribbed from a fan page entitled “jojos lil padded cell” (SIC). I have nothing else to add on that front.

So instead, let’s add even more personal context, this time in relation to present musical taste. I have a mixed relationship with Nicki Minaj. The Nicki of “Roman’s Revenge” is fierce, confrontational, and on fire. We could talk about whether or not she’s trying to play up masculine things (and whether or not that’s bad) another time, but I still love this Nicki. By comparison, the Nicki of songs like “Starships” and of really terrible British accents is confusing (in a bad way). People freaked out over Nicki’s Grammy performance last year because of its anti-Catholic bent, but most remember it because it sucked.

Still, the above meme comparison confuses me, in more ways than a guy listing his love of oranges and lamenting that people really love kiwis. They’re both fruits, but of decidedly different types and representations of society. I guess I shouldn’t be confused. I mean, this argument has went on for ages in popular music and has defined full genres. Even back to the 1950s, Frank Sinatra fans couldn’t stand Chuck Berry and vice-versa. Rock was formed out of a backbone of African-American performance while acts like Johnny Mathis opted for a performing style with whitebread personalities like Andy Williams.

Even the same sort of resentment came out of mashup efforts. Public Enemy and Anthrax, makers of a beloved cover of PE’s own “Bring the Noise,” went on tour together and Chuck D simply labeled the tour itself to be difficult. Fans of one genre, even in a world where people put “I like everything” on their Facebook profiles, tend to be confused by another in an immediate setting. And then I’m confused by why this mindset exists because music generally is just different ways to get to the same end.


I don’t know. If there’s one thing I do well, it’s be lost by everything that can be easily explained very quickly. That’s memes, I guess. Easy ways to crack wise on a general topic, as sharp or completely idiotic as that can be.

Super Balls

Hi, gang. So I hear the sprots happened, but whatever, let’s talk about sex capitalism, babes. And power outages and sideline reporters. Actually, you know what? That might be covered. So it’s all ads now!

I have a mixed relationship with ad criticism. On one hand, mocking dudebro behavior (or appealing to such) is always a worthwhile enterprise to me, and it’s also fucked that shit like the Audi ad still exists. (More on that later.) On the other, people don’t suddenly change their views on culture because Bar Rafaeli made out with a nerd archetype. After all, they’re just selling shit here like trucks and beer and the inexplicable continuation of Vin Diesel’s career. Yet this is art for low culture masses who have never even heard about a film like Winter’s Bone much less would have an interest in watching it.

So instead, I’m going to talk about some shit.


These jokes will not get better. I would rather give a self-aware warning than a feeling of contempt for my audience. This would always be first in the land of critique, because it exposes one of those dated concepts: the gross-out comedy. Somehow in a world where the internet exists, gross out comedy still attracts attention! It’s like how YouTube vids of a woman’s cleavage gets 10 million views when Googling say Stoya’s name (I like her, as you’ll find) pretty much exposes nudity for days. There’s even feminist porn! (As we’ll also talk about.) But like the ad itself, this is giving too much attention to an ad that was going to get it.


You know what’s great about buying cars? They change the properties of the world around you! Everyone, even people you have never met for a long enough period of time to judge any part of consent, is affected by your amazing car! Especially European cars that will totally not get you judged in many American regions of the country. (You know, the same ones that treated the Paul Harvey farmer Dodge ad like it was a reading of the gospel.) But for real, like asking girls to kiss you is a good idea, yeah? If you’re a high schooler, probably do that. And it’s okay to be the awkward dude instead of the brash sexual assaulter with a cockbag’s car. I survived.


I find it funny that advertising is stuck in that age where crossdressing is apparently still fucking hilarious. It’s so evocative of the way ads desperately seek the boom periods of the past, namely the 1990s and its love of crass comedy (of the pre-Apatow vein). There was a particularly bizarre motif on this show, similar to last year, of “difference comedy.” There was old people going to Taco Bell, white dudes making kind of creepy Jamaican rastafarian accents, and Calvin Klein making the greatest underwear ad ever (true comedy for dudebros cringing across the country). That difference comedy sort of always infects Super Bowl ads as a bit of a cheap and easy motif, but it almost never fully commits to the idea. A 30 second ad never gets to the true comedy of white people co-opting black culture (as satire) or the heart of an average guy being fine with feminizing his attire choices for his daughter. It’s all a one joke punchline because that is all a premise that short allows for. What I’m saying is we need the story of normal dudes in drag told by people not named Marlon Wayans. Get John Waters on that?


This is post one. I don’t know where we’re going this week, but keep reading. I would love to see some comments as well. Get your lulz out.