Them Cartoons is Nekked...
Mood:  special
Now Playing: Stereophonics ? Maybe Tomorrow
OK folks—WTF!?! You know me. I’m a middle of the road ‘R’ AKA a moderate. I wish I could be more enthused by the Republican party, but sometimes the fervor there is scarier than Tom Cruise giggling (like a girl getting diddled for the first time) about Katie Holmes. Is it just me or is that beyond nauseating? Talk about being so over enthused that you sound like a friend of Dorothy fervently trying to take cover…oh don’t get me started… but I digress…

So the other night, I am home chillin’ with some Pino Grigio (God that’s fun to say!) when I see an ad for Koolaid (rock on red beverage-bearing/thirst quenching guy) in his super cool sailor hat and big white tennis sans socks (traditional wardrobe for this pitcher) and I realize something isn’t right…something is rotten in Ajo so to speak. But I can’t figure out what’s different. Has he had a brow lift? If his hat more Monica Lewinski beret than a jaunty sailor’s cap? Is his expression fiercer? What is it? Then I realize--it hits me: the big red guy is wearing clothing! He’s got khaki shorts on! WTF?!?! What’s up with that?

How asinine is it that, in the attempt to be PC, we feel the need to assign a gender to a fricking cartoon character of an inanimate object? I mean really, how many male or female beverage pitchers you have run into? Exactly! It’s a fricking make believe mascot/identity branding/market tool for a sugary kid’s beverage and the decision has been made that he is obviously ‘notally taked’ and must wear pants. Can’t have the big red guy wearing only a sailor’s hat and sockless tennis shoes…people might start thinking he’s having a three way with Chester Cheeta and one of the California Raisins (reps for both fictional characters deny any such involvement with the Koolaid character).

Maybe I’m alone here. I don’t know. It has just NEVER occurred to me to contemplate their gender and I am a pretty sick person when it comes to my sense of humor so this is something I might have actually considered.

So when does it end? After the Stay Puff marshmallow man has to put on some Carhart shop pants? After the Pillsbury Dough Boy is giggling in plaid Bermuda shorts? They don’t even have genitalia—why do they have to wear clothes? Why is it that everything needs a sexual identity? —especially fictional animated creatures?

When will the Christian Right and the friends of Anne Coulter (don’t hate on me folks—she’s fricking nuts!) back the hell off from worrying about children’s morals being compromised and their lives doomed to one of crime because a dancing peanut with a monocle isn’t wearing any trousers?

Oh well, I need to sign off now, the talk about super sexy Mr. Peanut has me all shades of…errr, nevermind.

Posted by azcoolchick0 at 4:21 PM NZD | Post Comment | Permalink
Updated: Friday, June 10, 2005 11:31 AM NZD