Thursday, May 21, 2009
OK, fine, how much do you like me?
All right, whatever, do you have 15 seconds to spare me?
My pal @micah over at Learn to Duck tonight nominated one of my tweets for a contest being hosted by Threadless, the baller t-shirt company worshiped by college students, slacker adults & witty fashionistas (& whatever the male parallel of that word is) everywhere. Tweets that win the most votes will be printed into t-shirts sold on Threadless - and the Twitterer who wrote it gets $500!
All you have to do is follow this link & click on "Heck yes!"
This whopping prize amounts to about a half a month's rent here in the District, & I sure could use it, especially as I move into a new apartment next week (WOOOO! More on this later). So will you click through & vote for my tweet? I would be forever grateful. You know, especially if I win.
PS: If I win, I'll buy the tee & host a giveaway. Woop woop! Isn't THAT stellar incentive?
PPS: Feel free to spread the word, if you're so inclined to be that helpful! :)
First things first: I attempt not to discuss my love life here. That's partially because I have absolutely no love life to discuss & partially because I'm not much of a public sharer, despite my penchant for tweeting, talking, gossiping. Yes, I recognize that all aspects of my personality ought to point to my being a public sharer, but it's simply not the case. I did talk about my Johnny Fajitas fling, if only briefly, because the nickname "Johnny Fajitas" was way too good to keep from you guys, but that's been the extent.
Anyway: I'm also not big on vulgarity. I like to swear when it gets the point across, which is fairly often, but I tend to shy away from words that reference genitalia. They feel inappropriate & make me uncomfortable, & I assume they make my grandmother & my boss uncomfortable, as well - & as we've determined in past posts, both of those folks read this blog. That said... goddamn it, do I love Speak On It's blog post today, genitalia vulgarity & all, about why she's still single in this city. Not for the faint of vocab, she writes:
When I look at people all bunned up in a relationship with baby #3 on the way that are 4 years younger than me, there are a few thoughts that run through my head.
1 - Well goddamn who the fuck decided to stick their dick in that thing at least FOUR FUCKING TIMES to make a NEW PERSON?
2 - How in the hell did they land a husband and I’m still single?! It must be the head. She HAS to be giving good head. Because duh.
3 - Aw, I want a husband and a house and 2.5 kids with a dog and a yard with a garden and the picturesque bullshit idea of a family life that we all love to cling to.
This is typically my train of thought upon running into young couples, as well, though such thoughts increase exponentially upon my encountering couples that don't seem to match. You know what I mean. This week, for example, I met a really unattractive woman. I also met her particularly attractive husband. And listen, don't give me your "It's not always about looks!" bullshiz. What are you, my kindergarten teacher? I know looks aren't everything. I get that. I'm down with that. And as a fairly average-looking individual myself, I very much rely on that cliche principle to assist me in landing hotter-than-average members of the opposite sex.
That couple I mentioned meeting, though, is, interestingly, not an anomaly here in the District. In fact, this city is teeming with mismatched couples just like them. Couples that are half Angelina Jolie & half Drew Carey. Half Pierce Brosnan & half Susan Boyle. Half Carrie Prejean & half Skeletor. (On second thought, I'll take the Skeletor half of that combo, please. This is one example in which the "personality trumps all" card really comes into play). And every time I spot one of these bafflingly mismatched couples, I have to admit that my thought process is typically as follows:
- "Wow, that attractive [insert gender here] must be really open-minded, accepting & kind."
- "Wow, that brutally unattractive [insert gender here] must be really effing charming and/or manipulative."