Soccer Players Are Wimps

The Stanley Cup playoffs are almost here! (Go Habs Go!) And in honour of Canada's national winter sport, I'm going to address one of my least favourite hockey player cliches: Chirping soccer players.

These are a few reasons why I think it makes you sound like a complete ijit when calling soccer players wimpy (Or whatever new slang hockey players have come up with. Hockey slang words deserve their own post because they are THE WORST):

• Soccer players are wearing less padding. They basically have styrofoam plates strapped to their shins and that's it. Give them a break, okay?
• There's spikes on those shoes! It's not the same as sliding around on a knife like hockey players do, but it has to be pretty painful, especially on bare skin. Hockey players are pretty much wearing suits of armour.
• In hockey, you can't make a big deal about it or you get chirped forever and called dumb hockey cliche names like *Insert whatever slang word is in style right now. I don't even know.* It's actually ruthless and wild. And most of the chirping comes from overweight hockey fans who tweet about how weak a player is for crying while their mom does their laundry for them in the next room, probably.
• You don't think that every hockey player who gets hit in the face with a puck DOESN'T secretly wish he could go curl up in his mommy's arms, do you? Because if that's what you think then I fear you are terribly wrong. I guarantee Crosby called up his mom and grunted lots of whiny things to her after he got hit in the face with that puck. Can you imagine if a hockey player cried? He would actually have to quit playing.

Anyway, the fact remains, that soccer (or football as it's known basically everywhere except Canada and the US. It doesn't even make sense to call American Football "football" because only a tiny percentage of the game involves touching the ball with your foot.) is the most popular sport in the world. Hockey is only most popular in Canada and Finland. Have you ever seen a German football game? People are setting stuff on fire, and storming onto the pitch. It's complete madness. In hockey, fans just blow those stupid plastic horns people hand out when you walk into the arena. So, clearly, regardless of how "wimpy" soccer is, there must be something exciting about it.

That being said, I hate watching soccer and I love watching hockey. But shut up with the "hockey players are the toughest athletes." Your sport is one fancy spin away from being figure skating, just remember that.

Buuut, I don't play either sport, so perhaps I should shut up.

I Don't Give A Fork

Forks are, in my opinion, one of the most unnecessary human inventions.

Now you're probably coming up with all kinds of foods that you think require forks because they are messy. (For example, waffles, chicken parm, pasta, salad, etc.) But now I'm going to name a few "finger-foods" that can be equally as messy: S'mores, beaver tails, chillidogs, etc. 

Basically everything can be eaten with your hands. (I'll talk about spoons in a minute, just hold your freaking horsies.) You just have to get over this weird fear that people have of getting food on your hands. Want to know what's really tasty? Licking spaghetti sauce/pie filling/peanut butter/whatever off your fingers when you're done eating. 

Seriously, eating and classiness should not go together. I often find that my inner ravenous beast comes out when I'm eating, so I don't want to be held back by strategically gathering up my pasta with a pronged utensil. I want to use my extremely versatile fingers to scoop that stuff up and shove it in my mouth. But society says that this isn't allowed. We aren't allowed to go to East Side Mario's and cram handfuls of pasta into our pieholes with our hands because we would be gawked at and possibly even asked to leave. By why? Why do you care what method of transportation I use to get sustenance off my plate and into my mouth?

Fancy restaurants are overrated. Have you ever seen Eat St.? Holy, the food on that show looks amazing. And all of it is messy and none of it is fancy but everyone who is even in the vicinity of the food is happy as a clam. Have you ever been to a fancy restaurant? The portions are small and the food is placed in such a way that you don't even want to touch it because clearly someone just spent ten minutes balancing your steak on top of a scallop and drizzling just the right amount of sauce (or something. Do those go together?) And everyone is so "polite" or "dainty" or "anorexic" that they only eat 2 of their 5 $30 pasta shells and three pieces of lettuce (but mysteriously the wine is all gone.)

Okay, so, back to utensils. Spoons. Spoons are used for slightly messier foods, ones that are more liquidy, in case you weren't sure. However, that are not necessary. I wouldn't necessarily suggest eating soup with your hands although it IS possible. But some of it may drip through the cracks and wasting is shameful. However, here's a fun tip: soup can be drunk (Drank? Drinked?) just like water (with big chunks floating in it.) And yogurt/pudding/ice cream/etc. can all be eaten with your hands, I've done it. 

Knives? Butter knives are dumb. They can barely even be used as weapons. Just slather it on there with your fingers. Whatever.

"But who cares whether or not we use forks and spoons?" Lot's of people. Think of how many resources are used up by manufacturing utensils. They're constantly being lost and broken so people need new ones. A monkey could find a lost fork and use it to stab out the eyeball of the monkey king. (Monkeys have monarchies right?) And plastic utensils?! They get left in landfills to pump toxins into the environment and dolphins are probably choking on them in the ocean.

And think about how much time could be saved if we didn't have to teach toddlers how to manage forks? We could just let them go ahead with their primal instincts and use their chubby little hands. (Shut up, people who point out that monkeys shove sticks into anthills. That's not even the same thing and you know it.) Plus there's no more need to embarrass yourself with airplane/choo choo train sounds while you're feeding your kid.

I think the main idea to take away from all this, however, is that society puts too much pressure on us while we're eating. Eating is one of the most natural things we can do. Do you think cavemen took the time to arrange their food and strategically place their cutlery before meals? No! Do you think they wiped their mouths on their napkins and held in their burps until they were alone in the bathroom later? No! Do you think they casually sipped their chardonnay with one pinky out? No!

I think we should all go back to our roots, and eat with our hands. We have soap and we have handwashing tutorial videos on Youtube. There is no reason that we should be afraid of germs. In fact, in a lot of cases, I question the cleanliness of cutlery in restaurants. I'm willing to bet that the guy whose credit card didn't work, who is paying off his bill by cleaning dishes in the back, isn't doing a very good job.

So, at your next dinner party, remember to not give a fork and eat with your hands.

What's Rock and Roll Anyway?

Anyone who has had anything to do with me on social media sites knew that this post was coming.

Whenever someone asks me what my favourite band is, I fully expect eye rolls and scoffing when I tell them that it's Fall Out Boy. Apparently it's "cool" to hate FOB. Or, it was.

But really, hating on Fall Out Boy is so 2008.

Or, it was.

Now, after a five year hiatus, the boys are back together and they have released a new album called Save Rock And Roll. Although, if you spend a lot of time in certain regions of the internet, you may be coerced into believing that they've sliced rock and roll's neck, thrown it in the back of a sedan and driven that sedan off a cliff instead of saving it.

Now, I can't be bothered with signing up for every website in order to argue against these buffoons who think they wrote the book on rock and roll and have a say in what is and isn't part of the genre. So, I've decided to write this.

This is a quote from a really good review of the new album on albsolutepunk.net:

"Elvis Presley was one quoted as saying, "Rock and Roll music, if you like it, if you feel it, you can't help but move to it." And while the internet will be plastered with reviews of this record taking issue with the band releasing an album that has the audacity to call itself Save Rock And Roll, the King already described every listen I've had with this album. I've worn out the soles in my shoes from tapping my foot so damn hard." - Jason Tate

I suggest you check out the whole review because, if nothing else, it's entertaining.

These guys are 30 years old. If they were still making pop-punk they would be a complete joke. (I'm talking to you, Jimmy Eat World. Sorry.) And as Jay-Z said, "N***** want my old s***, buy my old albums." Pop-punk is dying. And I hate to say it, because I love it. (I bought an old Brand New album not too long ago and jammed out to it hard. I don't know what the point of this factoid is. I think I just wanted to say "old Brand New album.") There's a time and place for pop-punk. And unfortunately 2013 is neither. However, if you really want it, there are still countless bands trying to make pop-punk happen, just do a quick search on iTunes.

And there's nothing wrong with changing your sound. In the same way that you don't listen to Barney and Friends' Greatest Hits anymore, your favourite bands may have had a change in their musical tastes. I think we can all understand and respect that.

Let's talk about Train in Vain by The Clash. That song was so punk rock, right? I'm really glad The Clash never strayed from their punk sound. It would have been just awful if they had decided to try their hand at a pop song. I'm sure it would have sounded terrible and never would have ranked #298 on The Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time list. (*shakes head*)

Or *pulls artists name from hat* Taylor Swift! She made a purely pop album but was still nominated for country music awards. And it was the pop music lovers who cut that album apart. Country fans ate it up, for the most part. Although, to be fair, I think country fans are a little more easy going when it comes to pop music than rock fans are.

But who cares about genres anyway? Why can't we just listen to a song and like it or dislike it? Why do we have to categorize it and rip it apart for not being part of a certain genre? Who cares!? A genre is a concept that was invented so we can easily discover new bands to like. There is no genre better than another. It's all relative to who you are and what sounds your ears like to hear. Some studies say that we like certain music based on our normal heart rate and other biological stuff. For example, I am generally not a fan of slow songs. Nothing against the artist or the art of writing a ballad. I just prefer a faster song. This makes sense if we take the heart rate theory into consideration.

And besides, these days there are too many subgenres and mixing of genres to even get a clear view of where bands belong. Why do bands have to belong anywhere? You're not the boss of them.

"Your old stuff was better" arguments aside, there are those who will always, no matter what, hate Fall Out Boy. "They're the worst band ever. They couldn't write a good song if it kicked them in the knee. Pete Wentz is a dick. Patrick used to be fat lol."

But it's funny, because somehow this terrible band has managed to sell out every single show on their comeback tour. Within hours of releasing the tickets. I would love to see all of these amateur internet critics take their s****y garage bands on tour and sell out a hole-in-the-wall pub, let alone any sizeable venue.

Even Nickelback, who, according to Twitter, is the worst band that ever existed, fills arenas every night. What's that about? Is it possible that they make music that certain people can relate to and enjoy? (I like Nickelback's old stuff. They're a bit repetitive though. They should take a page from FOB's book and change it up a bit. But of course, then everyone would hate them for changing. It's tough out there.)

But, at the end of the day, Fall Out Boy didn't make this album for you. They made it for themselves. They've made that unbelievably clear. They said it themselves, "It's what you love, not who loves you."

But why do I love Fall Out Boy? The simple answer might be that marrying Patrick Stump is my greatest desire. Oh, did you guys think it was about their music? (That was a joke. It is the music! It is!) Patrick has a way of writing hooks that I just can't get enough of. And Pete's lyrics are a mystery that I love to try to solve. But he never means what you think he means. And I can't even start about Patrick's voice because I don't know any words that mean "more beautiful than a thousand angels' whispers flowing over the strings of a violin." I really love him, okay!?

This morning, when I saw that the band had released the album early, I actually had a few tears. I don't cry about stuff. It was weird, to say the least. I don't like feelings. I worry about my actions when I see them live in a month and a half. However, this isn't a review of the album, so I'm only going to say that I've been listening to Rat A Tat (ft. Courtney Love) for I think two hours straight.

Wrapping this up now. I'm sorry if you're stuck in a land where only one genre is good enough. It's a lot more fun to live song-to-song. If you like it, then like it. If you don't then shut up.

"So, f*** you, you can go cry me an ocean and leave me be."

The album isn't out for real until April 16, but the band has released it on Soundcloud, so enjoy.
Save Rock And Roll

Let's Save The Environment

So, if global warming is the big deal that everyone says it is (ACTUALLY, I suggest you look up "global cooling" because that's actually much more terrifying) I think we should be sacrificing our lavish lifestyles a little more, don't you think? So, I have made a list of some ideas that I have to save the environment!

1. Tear out toilets. Toilets are, in my opinion, kind of the most pointless human invention out there. Like, even more pointless than *insert whatever human invention you think is the most pointless here*. If we really want to save the environment, we would stop pooping into our fresh water and instead we would drop our waste in holes in the ground and use our poop as fertilizer or fuel or maybe even act like rabbits and eat it a second time to get out ALL the nutrients. (Sorry, maybe that one was too far.)
2. Night Vision Goggles. No more lights. Just goggles. If you can't get yourself some goggles, this is not our problem. Get goggles or you will be attacked on the street in the night or stub your toes at least 16 times a day because lights will no longer be allowed.
3. Remove remote controls. This would not only save a lot of batteries for more important things like all the intense situations in Duracell commercials, but it would also pretty much a. solve obesity (Getting up to change the channel is basically a work out for some people.) and b. encourage kids to read more (Because I would sure as hell rather read than stand at the TV and flick through the channels until I find something good to watch.) which are two extreme first world problems, I believe.
4. Work while you work out. People are at the gym on the treadmill or that stationary bike thing (I don't go to the gym, I don't know names) and all that precious energy is completely going to waste. We need to hook that stuff up to something rather and use all of the generated energy for other things instead of just pumping it randomly out into the wilderness. This one seems beyond obvious to me and I bet aliens have already figured out how to secretly harness all of the energy that is created on those bike things. Also, all track races should take place on a track that can take advantage of the energy somehow as well. Like, in human sized hamster wheels. This idea has probably already been explored but I don't see why we aren't doing it. Gym classes in schools - instead of running laps you do a few minutes on the hamster wheel to charge up the lights. It's the same thing as laps so it's not unethical!
5. The Subway solution. Statistics say that Subway restaurants cause 15% of the content in landfills due to the amount of paper they use when they wrap up their subs. (Note: There may not actually be any statistics that say this.) If Subway used less paper, we would pretty much have this crisis taken care of and we would also be able to eat our subs without folding, tearing, crumpling and swearing.

Share your ideas in the comment section!