#SMH Fridays, Week of Aug. 23

Welcome to #SMH Fridays! Obviously, that’s Internet speak for “shaking my head” Fridays, but you already knew that. 

Here at Red Alert Politics we spend entirely too much time on the internet and some of the things that we see out there are just absolutely astonishing/mind-blowing/horrifying/disgusting/trendy/weird/insert any adjective here. As such, we have decided to start #SMH Fridays as a way to share those stories with you.

In this weekly series, our staff members will share their favorite “That’s So Internet” story in this post, along with their unfiltered commentary. Here’s last week’s edition for the gist of what it’s all about. Enjoy!

Ashley Dobson

It’s Friday and once again I have been informed that the patriarchy is holding me down.

In a piece for The Week titled, “The problem with ‘boyfriend’ jeans,” writer Elisha Strauss told me all about how degrading it is to women that this larger style of jeans existed.

Here’s what’s so off about the boyfriendization of women’s clothing: It implies that a woman should only wear baggy clothes after she has secured a mate. Before that we really should be showcasing one’s body in more fitted apparel. This frames getting dressed as something that is done primarily for the male gaze, when most women know that, more often than not, we dress for ourselves and others. They also suggest that a woman should be straight, smaller than men, and young — older women tend to have husbands, wives, and partners. Imagine trying to explain this label to a first-grader. It’s ridiculous.

As Katherine Timpf at National Review points out, this argument is, in and of itself, pretty ridiculous.

Hmmm . . . that’s interesting. After all, I’ve never heard “boyfriend jeans” and thought, “Oh, jeans you can wear only if you have a boyfriend.” Rather, I assumed the name came from the fact that men’s clothing tends to be larger than women’s clothing.

My biggest issue with this whole thing is not MEN keeping me down or whatever, it’s that so-called boyfriend jeans look almost universally horrible on anyone who wears them.

When someone as gorgeous as Victoria Beckham still looks like she pooped her pants in them, it seems much easier to use that excuse to get rid of them rather than the patriarchy.

BUT WHATEVER THE OUTRAGE MACHINE MUST KEEP TURNING.

Ryan James Girdusky

Over the pond in the United Kingdom, a Labor MP, who is running for party leadership, has an idea about how to end sexual assault on trains — ban men.

Sexual assaults on trains and platforms have risen 25 percent in the U.K. last year and in some areas of the country it has reached a real crisis level.

So in the left’s endless wisdom, MP Jeremy Corbyn has proposed “women-only train cars” on Wednesday for all trains after 10 p.m.

“My intention would be to make public transport safer for everyone from the train platform, to the bus stop to the mode of transport itself. I would consult with women and open it up to hear their views on whether women-only carriages would be welcome – and also if piloting this at times and [on] modes of transport where harassment is reported most frequently would be of interest,” Corbyn said an interview with the BBC.

Some countries still have female-only cars including Japan, India, Indonesia, and Mexico.

Rather than enforcing gender assigned train cars, which will only bring a lawsuit when Caitlyn Jenner wants to visit and ride the trolly, how about you let women carry firearms.

Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, handguns are basically banned in all areas outside Northern Ireland.

Give a woman the chance to blow off a man’s “todger” and he may reconsider preying on ladies who can defend themselves.

As the old saying goes, “God made man and woman but Samuel Colt made them equals.”

Meghan Keenan

This week, my SMH is dedicated to Mariah Carey, because for inexplicable reasons she is one of the few celebrities that really bother me.

This week, Random House Children’s Books announced the release of Mariah’s “All I Want for Christmas Is You” picture book coming out this fall.

“When I wrote ‘All I Want For Christmas Is You’ it was my dream for it to become a classic Christmas song,” said Carey in a statement provided to BuzzFeed. “I am so proud of the song’s impact as it continues to create memories for fans each year. I am thrilled to be able to bring the story of the song to new generations of families with the picture book.”

That’s right, in addition to all the royalties she is currently getting when that song is played 1,000 times a day every December, she is now trying to make even more money off a song that she made in 1994. (Check out this ‘90s music video, seriously).

She is just the worst.

Rebecca Downs

Jerry Seinfeld and his wife dared to operate a charity lemonade stand in East Hampton. My SMH is not dedicated to the Seinfeld family, but rather their uptight neighbors. Honestly, is there any other kind in East Hampton though?

Police Chief Jerry Larsen shared with a local Hamptons paper that they received complaints over illegal parking and that the lemonade stand was considered “peddling.” All forms of peddling are illegal in the village.

As for the neighbors, you live in the East Hamptons, by Jerry Seinfeld, and it’s hot in the summer. You have to expect there’s going to be a lot of cars.

Sadly, that Chief Larsen shares the same first name as the comedian didn’t seem to matter and the lemonade stand was shut down.

The events of Aug. 18 resulted in a rather silly “arrest” shot Jessica Seinfeld shared on her Instagram. The lemonade stand had been operating since 2001 before it was shut down. It benefited Baby Buggy, which provides 16 million pieces of baby items for needy families.

The law is the law and the family took it well. But still, way to go shutting down such a nice philanthropic effort.

Anthony Hennen

Quentin Tarantino decided to break my heart this week.

After promising a great Christmas present, The Hateful Eight, he had to tell Vulture that President Obama is “my favorite president, hands down, of my lifetime.”

Not that I care about a film director loving a Democratic president (the idea of having a favorite president in general offends me). A celebrity being a Democratic isn’t much of a shocker.

It’s the reasoning that’s so terrible.

He’s been awesome this past year. Especially the rapid, one-after-another-after-another-after-another aspect of it. It’s almost like take no prisoners. His he-doesn’t-give-a-shit attitude has just been so cool. Everyone always talks about these lame-duck presidents. I’ve never seen anybody end with this kind of ending. All the people who supported him along the way that questioned this or that and the other? All of their questions are being answered now.

A politician who takes action when he is immune from another election isn’t exactly courageous. It’s a sign that he doesn’t have enough political skill or persuasion to do much when he faces a backlash.

People like “strong leaders” when “strong leaders” do what they want them to do, but when that stops, then people call a “strong leader” a dictator. Americans get envious of how much rail the Chinese government can build, but they ignore that the American government can’t do that because Americans still have some rights against the government. I’ll take property rights over a better rail system, even though I love trains.

Tarantino gets paid to make great films though, not offer nuanced political analysis. I’ll pay to see The Hateful Eight anyway. So here’s to Quentin, a great director and an irrelevant political thinker.

Related Content