This Month in Pop

As May comes to a close and 2011 continues to speed ahead at a record pace (this year is flying by), it's time to check in on the best pop culture that I consumed in the past 31 days.

Best TV Show I watched- The two part season finale of the Thursday night NBC show Community (5/5 and 5/12). I’ve probably said this about 5-6 different shows, but this might be the most underrated show on TV. It’s certainly the most unique. What I love about Community is that it’s the opposite of your typical comedy/sitcom. There is no formula that each episode generally follows. Community tries new things virtually every episode. It's completely unconventional. Sometimes they fall flat on their faces (the clamation Christmas episode), but other times they hit the ball out of the park and that’s what they did with this two part finale. Of all the shows that just had their finales Community’s was far and away the best.

I also enjoyed- The Tosh.O season premiere (5/17). I’ve definitely said this about 5-6 shows, but this time I really mean it. Tosh.O is the funniest show on TV. Sure there are a few lackluster shows every now and then, but most of the time it’s a non stop laughfest. In this episode Tosh showed a video where a shark farts a green gas, got punched in the face by Manny Pacquiao, and gave the "Chocolate Rain" guy Tay Zonday a web redemption.

Tosh.0
Tags: Tosh.0 Videos,Daniel Tosh,Web Redemption

Best Movie I saw- I watched about 5-6 movies this month and none of them were that great. I guess the one that I enjoyed the most was Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer. Did you know the high priced escort that used this scandal to become quasi famous by posing for Playboy, Ashley Dupre, only had sex with Spitzer once?



There was a different call girl from the same company who was the former governor’s favorite. Apparently she now works in finance. Dupre, on the other hand, is now a sex columnist for the New York Post.

I didn’t go for- Never Let Me Go, which stars Carey Mulligan and my girl Keira Knightley, is based on a novel written by the famous Japanese-English author Kazuo Ishiguro (he also wrote The Remains of the Day which was adapted into an Academy Award nominated film) so I thought it would be good, but it was terrible. Seriously, don't waste your time.

Best Thing I heard- The crowd at Citizen’s Bank Park chanting U-S-A after they found out that Bin Laden had been killed. Phillie fans are often regarded as the worst in sports, but boy were they the best on Sunday, May 1st. I understand the counter argument where some people think that it was a little weird that we celebrated death, but the way that this chant started is just awesome. It wasn’t like the news of Bin Laden's death was flashed on the scoreboard. People just found out by checking their phones and telling the people around them. Then the crowd erupted into jubilant U-S-A chants that seemed to last for an hour. The best part is that the players didn’t even know what they were chanting for until someone in the dugout went into the clubhouse and turned on a TV.

Best Thing I read- I haven’t read any good books this month, so I will take this opportunity to point you in the direction of a website that was recommended to me earlier this month. It is called Bros Like This Site and it’s about 5 notches above me in terms of egomaniacal, misogynistic humor.

I want to read- The two person book club that I’m in with my buddy Kyle Korver decided on the following two books without as much as a discussion about it. We just happened to buy the same two books on our own volition.

1.) Those Guys Have All the Fun by James Andrew Miller



This book provides a look inside the world of ESPN. Apparently it’s a PR nightmare for ESPN because it has an assortment of embarrassing stories and rumors about ESPN personalities.

2.) The Captain by Ian O'Connor



I have long been a Yankee hater, but I’ve always respected Derek Jeter. In fact I dedicated an entire blog post to him back in January 2010. I think he’s a fascinating figure and I’m interested to a get a behind the scenes look at the face of the most successful franchise in sports.

Hypothetical Interrogatives

As I recently perused the Cultural Studies section at my local Barnes & Noble (I go there quite a bit), I stumbled across what looked like a book on tape by my man Chuck Klosterman. As I took it off the shelf I realized that it was actually a deck of 50 cards each with a Klosterman hypothetical question on it.



After I enjoyed the hypotheticals that he posed in his book "Chuck Klosterman IV" I had to buy it. Unfortunately many of the hypotheticals from the book were included in the deck of 50 cards, but there were still plenty of intriguing questions raised.

I particularly enjoyed the preamble:

"Some people are extremely good at making small talk. These people are better known as “idiots.” These are the kind of humans who can talk to a stranger for 40 minutes without learning anything essential about who that stranger is−they talk about the weather and about other people, and they mention what kind of car they drive and how old their children are. They have conversations in public that are ultimately no different than silence in an empty room.

I refuse to be that kind of person.

I refuse to make small talk. I refuse. I don’t care what the situation is or what the protocol is supposed to be: I see no value in asking someone a friendly, nonadversarial question if neither party cares what the answer is. Instead, I prefer to ask questions where the solution is irrelevant−I pose hypothetical questions where how one answers the query matters far more than the literal conclusion. There is no “right” answer to these kinds of questions. The end never matters; what matters is how you get to the end. What matters is how you think, not what you think.

If these questions seem absurd or boorish or juvenile−that’s totally fine. Don’t read them and don’t answer them. We don’t need to be friends. We are not the same. But if you want to find out who other people really are, these are the conversations you need to have. And you need to have them now."

As loyal Shampoo Effect readers will remember I, too, am annoyed by the mundane daily conversations about the weather, etc.

March 2009

As intrigued as I am by Klosterman's refusal to make small talk I don't think I am currently able to weave his hypotheticals into daily conversations, although I would certainly like to be.

Here are a few of Klosterman's hypotheticals that I found particularly interesting:


1.) Imagine the following three sensations.

-Chewing and swallowing the first mouthful of your favorite food after starving yourself for 48 straight hours. The food is prepared perfectly.

-Lying down on an especially cozy bed after 12 hours of nonstop physical labor on a cold day.

-The first moment of urinary release after having held a completely full bladder for more than 90 minutes.

For the rest of your life, you will feel one of these three ways, all the time. This is how you will always feel, 24 hours a day (you won’t be doing the specific activity, but you’ll always be experiencing the act’s accompanying euphoria).

Which one will you select?

My answer: While all three are incredible feelings I think I would choose the feeling of lying down on an especially cozy bed after 12 hours of nonstop physical labor on a cold day because I would want to live the rest of my life with that sense of relaxation running through my body. Quite frankly I don't think the other two translate nearly as well to daily life. They are more momentary senses of elation whereas the calm, comfortable feeling of lying on a cozy bed is applicable in real world scenarios.


2.) Defying all expectation, a group of Scottish marine biologists capture a live Loch Ness Monster. In an almost unbelievable coincidence, a bear hunter in the Pacific Northwest shoots a Sasquatch in the thigh, thereby allowing zoologists to take the furry monster into captivity. These events happen on the same afternoon. That evening, the President announces that he may have thyroid cancer and will undergo a biopsy later that week.

You are the front-page editor of the New York Times: What do you run as the biggest story?

My answer: My natural inclination, as a politics minor (no big deal), is that the story about the President is the most newsworthy and the most recent, but it definitely wouldn't be my choice. That's a developing story. Catching Bigfoot and Nessy is a one time thing (although details will obviously continue to come out as scientists do their thing). This decision would ultimately come down to which picture/headline combination was the best. I mean, I don't want to cop out and say that I'd put the pictures of the two beasts side by side and write a dual headline ("Captivating!", "Believe It Or Not!", or "Monster Catches"), even though that's what would make the most sense.

That said I'd go with Bigfoot because it happened in North America and our country has always been a little more fascinated with him than Nessy.


3.) You are presented with a strange challenge. Someone dares you to count backward from 300 to 0. If you succeed at this simple request, you will be given $25,000 in cash. However, if you misspeak, get any digit incorrect, or make any mistake whatsoever, you will immediately be doused with gasoline and burned alive.

Do you attempt this challenge?

My answer: NO WAY. I like my chances (I'd go real slow), but I think the pressure would get to me and I would stumble and burn alive. In a semi-related note, I often marvel at the ability of college basketball players to make clutch free throws late in games. I always say that I would either shoot the ball either 6 feet in front of me or into the 3rd row.


4.) Imagine your dream house (whatever that house may be.) Think of all the details you would like this home to possess, including furniture. You are suddenly given the opportunity to trade wherever you live now for this hypothetical home, and your mortgage will be whatever you currently pay now. The home will be in (roughly) the same location as your current residence. However, there is one odd caveat.

This “dream home” is buried two miles underground. When you look out of the windows all you will see is dirt. In order to enter the residence, you will have to take an elevator that travels down the two-mile shaft at high speed (it’s about a five-minute trip). The elevator is comfortable and there is a staff (located aboveground) that provides 24/7 maintenance on the elevator−if something breaks or goes wrong with the elevator, you will be rescued immediately.

Would you accept this underground dream home?

My answer: Yes, as long as the head of the elevator workers is named Alfred.


5.) You meet a wizard in downtown Chicago. The wizard tells you he can make you more attractive if you pay him money. When you ask how this process works, the wizard points to a random person on the street. You look at this random stranger. The wizard says, “I will now make them a dollar more attractive.” He waves his magic wand. Ostensibly, this person does not change at all; as far as you can tell, nothing is different. But−somehow−this person is suddenly a little more appealing. The tangible difference is invisible to the naked eye, but you can’t deny that this person is vaguely sexier. This wizard has a weird rule, though−you can only pay him once. You can’t keep giving him money until you’re satisfied. You can only pay him one lump sum up front.

How much cash do you give the wizard?

My answer: This one is tricky because you don't want to push the envelope too far and have everyone that you know suspect that you went Heidi Montag on them (although I wouldn't say that she looks better than she did). I've gone back and forth on this (between $20 and $200), but if $1 made this random person vaguely sexier than I think $50 would work wonders.


6.) At long last, someone invents “the dream VCR.” This machine allows you to tape an entire evening’s worth of your own dreams, which you can then watch at your leisure. However, the inventor of the dream VCR will only allow you to use this device if you agree to a strange caveat. When you watch your dreams, you must do so with your family and your closest friends in the same room. They get to watch your dreams along with you. And if you don’t agree to this, you can’t use the dream VCR.

Would you still do this?

My answer: Yes, as long as I didn't wake up with wet sheets. I don't have too much to hide.


7.) For whatever reason, two unauthorized movies are made about your life. The first is an independently released documentary, primarily comprised of interviews with people who know you and bootleg footage from your actual life. Critics are describing the documentary as “brutally honest and relentlessly fair.” Meanwhile Columbia TriStar has produced a big budget biopic of your life, casting major Hollywood stars as you and all of your acquaintances; though the movie is based on actual events, screenwriters have taken some liberties with the facts. Critics are split on the artistic merits of this fictionalized account, but audiences love it.

Which film would you be more interested in seeing?

My answer: I'd be much more interested in seeing the Columbia TriStar biopic. The documentary would be cool too, but I'd be more intrigued by the writing, liberties taken, and Hollywood actors playing my friends and family than by what people I know said about me on camera.

This does raise an interesting question that I often ask people to spice up conversations. If there was a movie based on your life, which actor/actress would you want to play you?

Here's a quick look at what the cast of my biopic might look like if I was the casting director:

The Stanman- obviously a cross between Denzel Washington and Leonardo DiCaprio. No, seriously Edward Norton. Actually he’s too old. What about Zach Gilford ? Probably too good looking, but we’re trying to sell some tickets, so let’s do it.

My unnamed cousin- Freddie Stroma (I’ve never heard of him until I just searched for young actors, but he’s got the look)



My buddy Kyle Korver- Taylor Lautner (the kid from Twilight)

My buddy Glancy- Phillip Seymour Hoffman

My buddy Max- Michael Pena

My buddy RJ- Shia LaBeouf

My buddy Hermo- Seth Rogan

My buddy Browny- Adam Brody



Female love interest #1- Aimee Teegarden

Female love interest #2- Minka Kelly

Female love interest #3- Keira Knightley

My dad- Jimmy Buffet (I don't know if he's an actor, but I do know that he's not only written a few songs, but also a few books)



My mom- Frances McDormand

My brother Mike- Jon Favreau

My brother Pat- Robert Downey, Jr.

My brother Jimmy- Ben Stiller

My twin sisters Maura and Elizabeth- Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen


8.) Think of a friend of yours−not your best friend, but someone who is (a) more than an acquaintance and (b) physically attractive. One day, while trolling the Internet, you accidentally come across three nude photographs of this person, reclined on a sofa bed. The pictures were clearly taken several years ago, but it’s unclear if the photos were casually posed or taken without the subject’s knowledge (your friend looks comfortable, but he/she is never looking directly into the lens of the camera). The pictures are not labeled, and your friend’s name is not listed anywhere on the site−but you’re certain that this is the same person you know.

What do you do with this information? Do you tell anyone?

My answer: Obviously this depends on whether or not the person is a male or female and on my relationship with that person. If it was a female I would almost definitely (90%) tell plenty of people about the pictures. If it were a male, I'd be very embarassed to have stumbled across the pictures so I the liklihood of me telling people would greatly diminish (45%).


9.) You are kidnapped by a diabolical (but completely honest) madman. He locks you up in an empty attic where the temperature is 100 degrees. Your feet and hands are tied together. There is no food or water. After 24 excruciating hours, the madman opens the attic door and enters with three glasses of ice water on a serving tray. He takes an eyedropper and squirts a colorless, odorless liquid into one of the glasses. “This is poison,” he tells you. He then blindfolds. When he removes the blindfold 30 seconds later, there is a drinking straw in each of the water glasses (but you have no idea which glass contains the poison). “Feel free to have a refreshing sip of water,” he says. “Of course, if you select the glass that contains the poison, you will be dead within ninety minutes. And−just so you know−I promise to release you from this attic…in forty-eight hours.” He then laughs maniacally and exits the attic, locking the door behind him.

What do you do? Do you gamble and drink, or do you try to wait out the madman?

My answer: I think the obvious answer is to try to wait out the madman, but if I were to crack I would drink from a glass in a position where I saw that the madman didn't squirt the poison. By that I mean that if he squirted the poison in the glass that was on the left before I was blindfolded I would drink from the glass that was in the middle or on the right after the blindfold was removed. Basically I wouldn't assume that he moved the glasses around while I was blindfolded.


10.) You are inside a very peculiar rock club: For whatever reason, the manager of the club demands that all his musical acts must take an extensive IQ test before he will allow them to perform. Tonight there are two acts on the bill, and they coincidentally share the same band name, The Industry Standard. Both bands are alleged to be awesome. Sadly, you only have one hour to spend at the club (due to another obligation), and the intermission between the two acts is very long (so you can’t watch both acts). You ask the manager which version of The Industry Standard you should watch. “I have no idea,” he says. “But I will tell you this. The first band had the highest test scores I’ve ever seen, anywhere. Each member of the band is technically a genius−one guy scored higher than Marilyn vos Savant. Conversely, the band playing second had some of the worst scores ever recorded. One member might actually be illiterate. However, I halfway suspect they were all drunk and mocking the entire process. I couldn’t tell for sure.”

Which version of The Industry Standard do you decide to see?

My answer: I think the prevailing thought is that musicians aren't intelligent, but they are incredibly creative thanks to a dark past or drug/alcohol use. I would pick the group that scored high on the IQ tests because I'm an elitist I think that would be more interesting than the stereotypical rock band.


11.) You meet your soul mate. However, there is a catch: Every three years, someone will break both of your soul mate’s collarbones with a Crescent wrench; and there is only one way you can stop this from happening: You must swallow a pill that will make every song you hear−for the rest of your life−sound as if it’s being performed by the band Alice in Chains. When you hear Creedence Clearwater Revival on the radio, it will sound (to your ears) like it’s being played by Alice in Chains. If you see Radiohead live, every one of their tunes will sound like it’s being covered by Alice in Chains. When you hear a commercial jingle on TV, it will sound like Alice in Chains; if you sing to yourself in the shower, your voice will sound like deceased Alice in Chains vocalist Layne Staley performing a cappella (but it will only sound this way to you).

Would you swallow the pill?

My answer: I enjoy music much more than I lead on, but yes and here's why. I can't fathom having to be with a woman who's dealing with the emotional damage from being attacked with a wrench every 3 years. She would probably be so emotionally scarred that she wouldn't leave the house.

It would absolutely suck to hear Alice in Chains every time I heard a song, but I think I could come to grips with the lack of musical differences quicker than dealing with a routinely injured (physically and emotionally) wife. In fact, I'd probably turn to classical music.


This last one isn't a Klosterman hypothetical. It's an interesting question my buddy Tyler asked me this weekend.

Assuming that after each attempt your energy/stamina returns to 100% which of the following do you think you could do first? Run for a 40 yard touchdown in an NFL game or strike out Ichiro Suzuki?

My answer: Although I would have 10 guys blocking for me I don't think that I have any chance of ever running for a 40 yard touchdown in an NFL game. Strikeouts are much more common (even for great hitters like Ichiro) than 40 yard TD runs. I figure that I would get better at pitching (maybe develop an off speed rather than just throwing my 70mph flames) the more chances I got whereas I wouldn't improve at all in the football scenario.

The Little Things

If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times. I'm an idea man. I thrive on enthusiasm. No seriously, for as long as I can remember I've had an idea to make a list/write a book about all of the little pleasures of life. The smell of pancakes in the morning, snow days, power naps, etc. Naturally I was a bit disappointed to come across a book at Barnes & Noble last week that had the exact same premise. In fact, it was clear that it was the second edition because of the title, "The Book of (even more) Awesome". So I bought it, read it, and didn't really enjoy it. The guy's writing style just bothered me. He thought he was funny, but wasn't, every 8th word was seemingly in bold for no apparent reason, and he ended every idea with AWESOME! Either way, the premise of the book is still rock solid, so I think it's appropriate to celebrate the little things in life that make us happy.

Finally getting that tiny piece of (insert food item here) out of your teeth- It’s pretty crazy that getting something stuck in your teeth virtually takes control of your entire consciousness. It’s all you can think of until you get it out. You’re constantly trying to unlodge whatever it is with your tongue, but it never works. That sensation when the popcorn kernel or whatever finally falls out is something else. A return to normalcy if you will.

Coming back to your bed after a long trip

Finally realizing where you know someone from after staring at them forever- This is similar to the feeling that you know something, it’s on the tip of your tongue, but you can’t connect the dots for a while, except with people it’s a feeling that’s intensified.

During freshman orientation in college they split us up into groups of about 14-15, have us play icebreakers, etc. There was a kid in my group who I swore I knew from somewhere else, but I couldn’t figure it out. I kept looking at him trying to think of where I knew him from. Finally it dawned on me. The kid looked exactly like the actor that played Mike Eruzione in the movie Miracle. Sure enough the kid lived on my floor during my freshman year and I, of course, told everyone about his doppelganger and he was known as “Rizzo” from then on.


(on the left)

After a long night of shenanigans in NYC I was walking through Grand Central on my way to catch a train and about 200 yards in front of me was an 50-60 year old man that I recognized, but I didn’t know why and obviously didn’t know his name. As I got to within about 10 feet of him I realized that he was one of my politics teacher in college, but for the life of me I couldn’t remember his name. Like a bumbling idiot I said something like, “Hey, you teach politics at Fairfield University, right? I took one of your classes.” He said, “Yes, Dan, how’s it going?” I still didn’t recall his name so I said, “Good, good. Great seeing you,” and kept moving like I was in a hurry, but I really wasn’t. No more than 10 minutes later his name came to me: Professor Kevin Cassidy.

Finding $20 in your winter coat

No longer getting ID’d- This actually might be a bad thing because it means we’re getting old, but 2 weeks ago I went to a Blue Jays/Yankees game with my buddy Mad Max and we stopped at a bar before heading into the stadium. I walked in first and was not asked to show ID, but Max, in his business attire because he came straight from the financial district, was.

Learning a new keyboard shortcut- I’m not exactly tech savvy, but about a year ago I learned CTL+Z, which is a shortcut that will undo your last action(s), and it has made my life soooo much easier at work. I often edit audio highlights/sound bytes at work and in the process I try to take out “umms” and “uhhs”, among other things (when people repeat themselves by saying the same thing in two different ways) and sometimes taking out a breath or a few words makes the audio sound unnatural and I have to go back (by hitting CTL+Z) and find a different way to clean up the byte.

The sound of waves crashing into a dock

“Glue Movies”-This is the terrible term that the author used to describe the movies that you always stop and watch if they are on TV. It doesn't matter if you catch the movie when its 5 minutes in or an hour and twenty minutes in, you're watching it. My top 5 (not necessarily ranked) are:

1.) The Shawshank Redemption
2.) A Few Good Men
3.) Enemy of the State
4.) Rounders
5.) The Departed

Getting a stuck ball out of somewhere by using another ball- Looking back, I feel like this happened once a month in my childhood. Either a wiffleball/football got stuck in a tree or a basketball/dodgeball got stuck in the rafters. Getting the ball unstuck was always a challenge. About 50% of the time another ball, bat, etc. would end up getting stuck in the process too, but it was quite the feeling when the ball became dislodged.

Walking into class and seeing a substitute teacher

Becoming a regular somewhere- This is one of my goals in life. Someday I want to be able to walk into a diner, deli, or whatever and have the person behind the counter start fixing my order without me having to say it. Back in 2009 I went to a Dunkin Donuts every Sunday morning before work for about a 5 month stretch and ordered the same exact thing (Medium coffee 2 and 2 and a chocolate glazed donut). About 75% of the times I went the same 16-17 year old kid took my order. Each week I walked up to the counter hoping he would just say, “Medium coffee 2 and 2 and a chocolate glazed donut, right?”, but it never happened.

When the plane suddenly speeds up on the runway- I’m usually frantically chewing gum so my ears don’t pop (and I always start chewing the gum about 10 minutes too soon), but this is still a pretty cool experience.

In fact, on the way to Spring Back during my senior year of college a bunch of us got to talking about how fast the plane is going just before it lifts off. Guesses were all over the map. 200, 250, 300, 175, etc. As our curiosity intensified we asked the stewardess to ask the pilot. If memory serves, and it usually does, the correct answer was about 150mph which isn’t really all that exciting.

Finally peeing after holding it forever

Realizing that you still remember your childhood friend’s phone number- What’s sad is that people our age are probably the last one’s that will ever experience this because knowing someone’s house number is no longer necessary. After entering someone’s number into a cell phone it’s rare that someone would then memorize that number. Either way, if anyone wants to call my friend J.J.’s old house the number is 315-656-9617.

Going on a field trip

Passing under a bridge on the highway when it’s pouring rain- That momentary break from the downpour, no matter how short-lived, is a bit comforting.

The fries at the bottom of the bag- I rarely eat fast food anymore (not that I’m a health nut or anything), but this was the best growing up.

When the bubbles in your drink go right to the top but not over- I feel like it takes a lottt for the bubbles to spill over because for all the times this happens I’d say that only about 10-25% of the time they spill over. Either way, it’s a pretty cool thing.

Putting on freshly ironed pants or sweatpants/socks straight from the dryer

When you fold a piece of paper so it fits in the envelope perfectly- I can’t tell you the amount of times that I’ve folded something in half (I think that’s just instinct) and then realized that I should have actually folded it into thirds. I’ll tell you what, though, I’m on a pretty good folding streak and when it lines up perfectly it feels pretty good.

Blurring the Line

I often marvel at what Sports Illustrated has accomplished. Somehow they've maintained a sterling reputation for their sports coverage while at the same time selling sex (their swimsuit issue). They've managed to successfully tap into the two things that most men are most interested in: sports and scantily clad women. This two pronged approach has no doubt elevated and helped them maintain their popularity. The reason I marvel at Sports Illustrated is because the notion of selling sex is something that ESPN would never (explicitly) condone. ESPN seems to have taken a separation of church and state approach when it comes to the top two interests of most males. This decision has no doubt led to an increase in ESPN's credibility among fans (although I would argue that Sports Illustrated hasn't lost any credibility because of their swimsuit issue) and in this business your reputation is everything. ESPN holds themselves to a higher standard and that's part of what makes them the worldwide leader in sports. Their strategy is tried and true and there's no sense in changing it.

However, if they did, wouldn't a calendar of female ESPN talent sell like hotcakes? There is almost no chance that this would ever happen because that would blur the lines too much. Sports Illustrated uses models for their swimsuit issue. They don't use their reporters, writers, etc. There's a degree of separation there.

That said, what would a calendar of ESPN female talent look like? Well, I'm glad you asked. It would look something like this.

Note- This would not be a swimsuit issue, but if some of the females wanted to pose in swimsuits I'm sure that no one would mind. In fact, it would probably be recommeneded that some do.


January- Wendi Nix



Wendi is the perfect ESPN female to kick off the calendar. She’s hot, but in a mature way. She’s a woman. The 36-year-old is from South Carolina, but she has Boston ties (ex-husband is the VP of Player Personnel for the Red Sox). She’s also very talented in that she’s not just a pretty face. She knows her stuff (specifically baseball and football).

Would she do it? I’m not entirely sure. I think she could be talked into it if a few others were already committed. Plus, if she’s now single then why not? Either way she would absolutely be required to wear her glasses.


February- Rachel Nichols



Who better to represent February than everyone’s favorite redhead? Rachel Nichols is one of those women who seems a lot more attractive than she is because of her profession. That’s not to say that she isn’t attractive. She is. It’s just that she gets a huge bump in her attractiveness because she’s a sports reporter. My one problem with Rachel, and maybe I’m nitpicking, is that she uses an excessive amount of gesticulations when she talks. Specifically head movements. She literally looks like a life-size bobblehead doll sometimes.

Fun Fact- Her mother-in-law is Diane Sawyer, so she has connections up the ying yang.

Not So Fun Fact- Nichols is 37 (turns 38 in October). I would’ve guessed 31.

Would she do it? Probably not, but she’s almost a necessity. If she did there’s no doubt that her photo shoot would take place in Hattiesburg, Mississippi because she’s spent more days there on Favre watch than she has in her own home.


March- Sara Walsh



She’s relatively new to ESPN (approximately 1 year) and a lot of people hate on her because she has a bit of a horseface, but she has legs for days and she seems like she has an engaging personality (She’s filled in on Fantasy Football Now and SportsNation). She grew up in Florida and is 33 years old.

Would she do it? Absolutely. She has to be looking for more exposure and what better venue than this?


April- Nicole Briscoe



You’ve probably never heard of her (unless you live in the South), but she works primarily on NASCAR shows and she’s a babe. Speaking of auto racing, the former Miss Illinois Teen USA was on the same cheerleading squad as Danica Patrick in highschool. Briscoe is 30 years old and she’s married to an IndyCar driver.

Would she do it? My guess would be no, but if this was actually happening I’m sure she could get talked into it pretty easily.


May- Hannah Storm



Hannah is probably the most accomplished female at ESPN (Not only did she graduate from Notre Dame, but she’s worked for CNN, NBC, CBS, and now ESPN/ABC). She’s also out of control hot for someone that’s turning 49 in a month. Seriously, she’s incredible to see in person. With her great looks and impressive resume (She’s interviewed George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, etc.) I hear that she can be quite the diva. Either way I think she’s a better NBA studio host than Stuart Scott, so there’s that. Storm (who’s real last name is Storen) is married to sportscaster Dan Hicks who does a lot of golf for NBC.

Would she do it? Hard to tell, but ultimately I’d say yes. If you’re closing in on 49 and you have a rocking body wouldn’t you want to show it off? The only thing that would hold her back is the credibility issue that has kept this project from happening in the first place.


June- Jenn Brown



Jenn Brown should be the next big thing among female sideline reporters. The former softball player at Florida works the sidelines primarily for college football games on ESPN and ESPN2. I almost get the sense that they are taking things slow with her, but I don’t know why. She’s 30 years old. She’s smoking hot (some people knock her for her fivehead, but she’s right up my alley). She graduated summa cum laude, so she’s smart. She played 5 varsity sports in highschool, so she has a great knowledge base. Quite frankly, I think she’s the total package.

Would she do it? In a heartbeat. She’s the best kept secret at ESPN and something like this would put her on the map nationally.


July- Erin Andrews



Obviously she’d be on the cover as well (We’re trying to move some product here). EA, who’s 33 by the way, is the most famous female sideline reporter in the business. Before her fame skyrocketed thanks to her appearance on Dancing With the Stars (which probably only happened because of the exposure she gained from the whole peephole thing) she was on the dance team (the Dazzlers) at the University of Florida, where she graduated in 2000. Back in the summer of 2007 when ESPN was trying to figure out who “the most now” athlete in sports was, my buddy Pete (Jose Bautista’s clone) concluded that it was actually Erin Andrews, who I believe hosted those segments.

Would she do it? I doubt it, but without her there would be no calendar. She would have the most leverage of any ESPN female and because of that it would probably take an exorbitant amount of cash to get her on board. Everyone has a price, so if the powers at be really wanted to make this happen (and they should) they probably could.


August- Sage Steele



For those of you that work normal hours, you probably don’t see Sage Steele too often, but she’s one of the regular hosts of the 10am and 11am weekday SportsCenters. She is tall, slender, and incredibly good looking. In fact, whenever one of our radio hosts sees her on a TV in a studio he infers that she is out of this world hot by saying “Sage Steele, take me to your leader”. Steele is 38 and I’m actually stunned by that. I would have guessed anywhere from 29 to 33.

Would she do it? Maybe. She’s the mother of 3 children and might be against posing for a calendar, but if her picture was shot somewhere on the set of SportsCenter or something I think she’d be more than agreeable.


September- Michelle Beadle



Beadle, the co-host of SportsNation, is perhaps the hottest name among female sportscasters these days. She is loved by many fans because she’s good looking and has an almost male personality. Basically she knows what she’s talking about, she’s funny, and she’s hot. Having met her a few times I can confirm that she is definitely hot and really cool off camera as well. In fact, a few weeks ago I lent her my headphones and after telling my brother about it he told me to never wash those headphones again (Which I guess is just something you say because who washes headphones?). Either way, as fate would have it, the very next day I attended a training session (we are moving into new studios in a matter of weeks) and was given a brand new set of headphones.

Would she do it? Definitely. She’d be all about it.


October- Suzy Kolber



Kolber is a multi-faceted talent at ESPN. She can work the sidelines with the best of them and she can also seamlessly host a football oriented studio show. She has a high football acumen, she has a great voice, and she’s extraordinarily nice. She’s not the best looking female talent at ESPN (hard to compete with Jenn Brown and Erin Andrews), but she’s definitely an attractive person. Also, October seems very appropriate for Suzy because of her football ties.

Would she do it? I think so. She handled the Joe Namath situation with incredible poise and grace and she’d handle this very professionally as well.


November- Shannon Spake



You probably haven’t seen, let alone heard of Shannon Spake (a bit of a porn star name, right?), but you probably want to get acquainted with her now. She’s mainly a NASCAR reporter, but I’ve also seen her work the sidelines for college basketball games and she’s worked a few college football games for us on radio.

Would she do it? Probably. If she wants to further advance her career she needs some more exposure.


December- Jeannine Edwards



Edwards is a veteran of the sideline reporting game who covers college football, college basketball, horse racing, etc. for ESPN. She received some national attention in January while working the sidelines at the Fiesta Bowl for ESPN Radio. Apparently in the pre-show meeting play-by-play man Ron Franklin was talking with fellow announcers Rod Gilmore and Ed Cunningham about Gilmore’s wife, who was recently elected as the mayor of Alameda, CA. When Edwards attempted to join in on the conversation Franklin reportedly said, “Why don’t you leave this to the boys, sweet cakes?” When Edwards took offense, Franklin reportedly called her an expletive. Franklin was pulled from the Fiesta Bowl broadcast and was subsequently fired.

Fun Fact- Guess who the (studio) producer was for that game? That's right. Yours truly.

Would she do it? No chance.


It should be noted that Stacey Dales would have been an ideal candidate for a women of ESPN Calendar.



Unfortunately, though, she left the company in November of 2008 because she was upset that she was forced to ride coach when other reporters rode first class. It became an impasse in contract negotiations and Dales chose to walk away.

This Month in Pop

Is it just me or is 2011 flying by? As April comes to an end I figured it was only fitting to recap the best of pop culture (that I consumed) from the month. In reality I totally ripped the idea from one of the pop culture blogs I read (they do it every Friday). Either way, this may or may not become a new staple to The Shampoo Effect.

Best TV Show I watched- Parks and Recreation on April 21st. My new favorite television character (and new Twitter avatar) Ron Swanson (played by Nick Offerman) fights to keep hamburgers on the lunch menu. He goes toe to toe with health and fitness freak boss Chris (played by Rob Lowe) in a cook off. Chris buys all sorts of earthy ingredients and makes an exquisite turkey burger. The judges (co-workers of the Parks and Rec staff) love it. Ron buys ground beef and hamburger buns. That’s it. The judges, and Chris like his burger more and hamburgers get to stay on the lunch menu.

You can watch the whole episode right here and I strongly recommend that you do.


I also enjoyed- The Office (I always love the Dundies and while I didn't love the Michael Scott farewell the goodbye with Pam was well done.), Big Love (a great comedy on CBS on Mondays at 8:30pm ET that stars Jason Biggs (American Pie) and Sarah Chalke (Scrubs)), The O’Reilly Factor, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and Friday Night Lights.

I didn’t go for- 30 Rock (It’s normally the funniest show on TV, but I didn’t care for 2 of the 3 episodes that aired this month (the gas leak and plan B), The Real World: Las Vegas

Best movie I saw- Love and Other Drugs- Back in the Fall when it was in theaters one of my friends called it “the best chick flick of all time.” Now I don’t know if I’d go that far, but it's definitely up there. I think the key to getting guys to liking a so-called chick flick is to have a male protagonist (i.e. (500) Days of Summer). That said, Anne Hathaway is half-naked for about half of the movie and her body is a lot nicer than I ever thought it was.

I want to see- Nothing that’s currently in theaters, but I’m sure I’ll see The Hangover Part II shortly after it comes out in late May. It should be noted that I’m already bracing myself for disappointment.

Best thing I heard- I’m currently mildly-obsessed with the Mumford & Sons album Sigh No More (2009). Everyone knows (or should know) about “Little Lion Man” and “The Cave”, but the entire CD is fantastic. Also, if I didn’t look it up a while back I would have thought that this English band was from somewhere in the South (Tennessee, Mississippi, etc.)

Best thing I read- "Chuck Klosterman IV: A Decade of Curious People and Dangerous Ideas". It’s the only book I read in its entirety in April and I devoted an entire blog post to it, so obviously I liked it.

I also enjoyed- The article on my new #1 celebrity crush Brittany Snow (she supplanted Zooey Deschanel, who held the title for a longgg time) from the April edition of Maxim, The Rolling Stone articles on Howard Stern (March 31st issue), Rihanna (April 14th issue), Ricky Gervais (April 14th issue), and Bill Maher (April 28th issue).

The (Rotten) Fruits of my Labor

I live in West Hartford, which is pretty much the middle of nowhere Connecticut. The best way to describe its location is "in-between Boston and New York City". In fact, most of the people who grew up in this area feel as if the equidistance between the two major cities gives them the right to pick and choose the sports teams that they like. You have New York Jets fans who also like the Boston Red Sox, New England Patriots fans who also root for the New York Rangers, etc. Quite frankly I find the whole notion despicable. You can't have it both ways. You need to pick one city and root for its teams. I mean, hell, Boston and New York are rivals in just about every sport.

I tell you this because, as a West Hartford resident, I have taken this liberty, but in a way that only marginally deals with sports. As many of you know I received my highest form of education at Fairfield University in Fairfield, CT, which is closer to New York than Boston, but a lot of kids from the surrounding Boston area go there. As a senior (junior? I'm not really sure. I'm getting old) in college many of my classmates began reading a Boston based website called barstoolsports.com. Despite the almost unbearable slant to Boston's professional sports teams it was a great website because of its largely male humor, pictures of hot chicks, relevant sports talk, gambling advice, etc.

In fact, the website became increasingly popular when one of our female classmates was featured as the bartender/model of the month. There was an interview, a bunch of racy pictures, and a video of the photo shoot set to the tune of the John Fogerty classic "Center Field" (I dare you to find a male from the Fairfield class of '08 that hears that song and doesn't think about this girl).

Quick sidenote- God bless Google for making those links so easy to find.

Not so quick sidenote- During my freshman year my buddy Robby and I co-hosted the best radio show in WVOF history. The station was located on the bottom floor of the campus center and right outside of it was a lounge area with chairs, couches, etc. Whatever was said on the radio was sent out not only on the airwaves, but also through a speaker directly outside the station (in the lounge area), but the volume was usually turned all the way down because people did their homework in this lounge area.

Well during one now infamous show this girl that was the bartender/model of the month for barstoolsports.com was sitting in a chair right outside the radio station and if memory serves she was looking particularly seductive. Sitting with her were two other complete smokehouses that were also in our grade. I forget how it happened exactly, but Robby or I must have briefly stumbled while trying to express some groundbreaking thought and when we were called on it (probably by Kyle Korver, who routinely sat in as our guest for hours at a time) we said something to the effect of how it was hard to focus when there were three incredibly hot girls sitting outside of the radio station (I probably should have mentioned this already, but the wall separating the station and the lounge area was made of glass). This (justified) excuse soon led to a little back and forth about how hot these girls were. As this was going on the future bartender/model of the month casually put her pen in her mouth, like most people do when they are trying to think of something. Well because radio is not a visual medium I, being the great broadcaster that I was, described the act by saying, "Oh my God...she just put her pen in her mouth. Her pen is now in her mouth."

Evidently the sound on the speakers wasn't turned all the way down that day because about 7 seconds after I made that comment (we broadcasted on delay in case anyone swore, etc.) all three girls turned and looked through the glass at Robby, Kyle Korver, and I. We quickly threw to our next song, but the awkwardness/embarassment level was at an all time high.

So a few years ago the barstoolsports empire expanded to New York and I have read both sites routinely ever since with the justification that I live directly in-between both cities. It has since expanded to Philadelphia and a site aimed at kids currently in college, but I don't read those.

Well this past Wednesday Barstool posted the following article that was written in the Fairfield student newspaper (The Mirror- which is a terrible way of signifying that the articles printed are a reflection of the student body as a whole. It should be noted that Fairfield annually ranks in the top five of “Most Homogenous Student Bodies” in all of those college review books because the student body is 88% white).

Barstool Sports.

Guys (dare I say gentlemen?) of Fairfield, please don’t tell me that your lives are so devoid of entertainment that you have to resort to staring at women whom you will never get anywhere near. And ladies, if you’ve just had a fight with your best friend, or you didn’t get that job you wanted, or you are feeling upset and/or suicidal and/or less than downright chipper in any way, DO NOT CHECK OUT THIS WEBSITE. Let’s make a website that makes women exploit themselves on the Internet so that guys can ogle for hours in front of the computer screen over strategically posed women and so girls can feel thoroughly insignificant despite their perfectly beautiful appearances. Yay! By the way, the tagline for Barstool Sports: “By the common man, for the common man.” How about, “By the desperate, unloved man, for the brainless, idiotic, male-chauvinistic, equally desperate and unloved man?” Yeah, I think that works. Of course, a few more profanities come to mind, but I don’t necessarily think they’re Stag-approved.

Naturally the Barstool writers ripped the girl that wrote this article to shreds, but I was none to pleased to see the article coming from my alma mater in the first place (someone tweeted me the link and someone else posted it on my Facebook wall). Seeing it caused me to feel slightly guilty because I know that I am least partially responsible for transforming Fairfield into a breeding ground for feminist idealogues.

As many of you know I wrote a gender driven weekly column for The Mirror as a senior at Fairfield. The roots of my egomaniacal, pompous, male chauvinist writing style trace back to this role (they actually can be traced a little further back, but who really cares that much?) My, for lack of a better term, incendiary writing caused a minor uproar on campus virtually from the get go. Shortly thereafter a class on feminist idealogy (I just threw up in my mouth as I typed that) devoted entire classes to dissecting my column. They even wrote an editorial to address the "hate speech" that they claimed I had used. I was asked and gladly attended a class on Race, Gender, and Ethics with my female editor to defend my column. As the weeks went on Facebook groups formed, letters to the editor came pouring in, and a new female group on campus, called "The Vagina Warriors" (I wish I was making this up), was formed.

The year after I graduated, as I was told by my former News Writing teacher, a new clause was added to the student handbook to address "hate speech". According to her, this was a direct result of my column. Probably because my shoes were too big to fill (that's just my ego talking) some twat took over my column and was neither funny nor controversial. The next year, though, a kid re-ignited the spark that I had lit and actually forced the administration to do away with the column altogether. A few females claimed sexual harassment (thanks to that new clause in the handbook) and after a little back and forth between the administration that was that. Quite frankly I thought this kid was writing specifically to stir up controversy (whereas I was writing to make guys laugh and my writing just so happened to incite females) and that he wasn't a good writer by any stretch of the imagination, but the uproar he caused far outweighed whatever I did back in '07-'08.

To deny that this recent feminist outcry is at least partially a byproduct of what I unintentionally started is simply inaccurate. It pains me to know that this army of femi-nazis is now part of my legacy (if you could even call it that).

Hypothetically Speaking

In my business, people don't discuss hypotheticals. Athletes, coaches, general managers, etc. generally refuse to answer questions about hypothetical situations. For example, if a reporter were to ask Albert Pujols whether or not he would sign with the Chicago Cubs in the off-season if they offered him a 10-year $300 million dollar contract he would not answer it. He would most likely say something to the effect of, "That's the last thing that's on my mind right now. My only focus is helping this team win baseball games."

The interesting thing is that hyptothetical questions make sports much more exciting. They often spurn debate and drive sports talk radio. People love speculating and hearing other speculate. For example, will Chris Paul opt out in the summer of 2012 and sign with the Knicks? Will Dwight Howard leave Orlando for the Lakers just like Shaquille O'Neal did?

Hypothetical questions, as unlikely as they are, also make life more interesting. Case in point, I just finished reading a book titled, "Chuck Klosterman IV: A Decade of Curious People and Dangerous Ideas". Klosterman, in case you don't know already, is a renowned writer in the world of popular culture. He mostly writes about rock music, musicians, athletes, trends, movies, and television shows. I wouldn't call his work academic, but it's not just "I like this movie" or "I don't like this TV show and here's why". He likes to contextualize pop culture and decipher it's larger meaning or purpose. If that confused you, don't feel bad. Half of his ideas confuse me too. They do offer a different way to look at things that we generally take for granted as purely entertainment, though, and that's why I like reading Klosterman's work.

"Chuck Klosterman IV" is a lot like Malcolm Gladwell's "What the Dog Saw" in that it's a collection of his past works. Klosterman presents a bunch of articles on various topics that he's written for different publications and provides a bit of background on each particular work. How he stumbled into the assignment, what he thought of the subject he interviewed, whether or not he liked the particular article, or a hypothetical situation that ostensibly relates to the article.

Now it is the hypothetical situations that ostensibly relate to his articles that interested me the most. More often than not I didn't exactly see the parallel between the hypothetical and the article, but because I did understand a few of them I assume they were all tied together in this manner (there's a 100 page portion of the book that introduces each article with a hypothetical). These seemingly abstract questions were both intriguing and thought provoking. Below are 10 of the approximately 15 chapters/articles that began this way. After each I will do my best to answer the question that is posed.


1.) You are given the chance to control what your legacy will be. You can’t specifically dictate how you will be recalled by future generations, but you are given the chance to choose between two general idioms of legacies.

The first kind of legacy (“option A”) would be that you lived your days as a good, honest person who worked hard and contributed to society. However, the limitation of this legacy will be that almost no one will know or remember this information (including future members of your own extended family). Most average people will never even know that you lived. The second kind of legacy (“option B”) will be familiar to almost everyone in the world for centuries to come. However, this legacy will be extremely strange and neutral; it will be an obscure fact that has almost nothing to do with your tangible day-to-day life (the best comparison being the legacy of General Tso Tsungtang, an extremely gifted and successful military leader during the seventeenth-century Qing Dynasty who is now exclusively remembered as the namesake for the popular Chinese dish General Tso’s chicken).

Which legacy do you want?

My answer: Ultimately I think this is a question about vanity. I think most people want to be remembered after they're dead and gone even if it's for something "strange and neutral". That said, I think the more popular answer is "option A" and I'd probably play it safe and say that even though I love General Tso's chicken.



2.) Think of someone who is your friend (do not select your best friend, but make sure the person is someone you would classify as “considerably more than an acquaintance”).

This friend is going to be attacked by a grizzly bear.

Now this person will survive this bear attack; that is guaranteed. There is a 100 percent chance that your friend will live. However, the extent of his injuries is unknown; he might receive nothing but a few superficial scratches, but he also might lose a limb (or multiple limbs). He might recover completely in twenty-four hours with nothing but a great story, or he might spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair.

Somehow, you have the ability to stop this attack from happening. You can magically save your friend from the bear. But his (or her) salvation will come at a peculiar price. If you choose to stop the bear, it will always rain. For the rest of your life, wherever you go, it will be raining. Sometimes it will pour and sometimes it will drizzle-but it will never not be raining. But it won’t rain over the totality of the earth, nor will the hydrological cycle be disrupted; these storm clouds will be isolated, and they will focus entirely on your specific whereabouts. You will never see the sun again.

Do you stop the bear and accept a lifetime of rain?

My answer: Absolutely not (and I won't tell you the name of the friend I was thinking of). Call me a bad friend if you want, but I hattte rain. I couldn't imagine having all of my future softball games, golfing events, and vacations rained out. I guess the best case scenario would be to move to Ireland and accept the rain everyday, but I don't think that I could do it.



3.) You work in an office, performing a job you find satisfying (and which compensates you adequately). The company that employs you is suddenly purchased by an eccentric millionaire who plans to immediately raise each person’s salary by 5 percent and extend an extra week of vacation to all full-time employees.

However, this new owner intends to enforce a somewhat radical dress code: every day, men will have to wear tuxedos, tails, and top hats (during summer months, male employees will be allowed to wear gray three-piece suits on “casual Fridays”). Women must exclusively work in formal wear, preferably ball gowns or prom dresses. Each employee will be given an annual $500 stipend to purchase necessary garments, but that money can only be spent on work-related clothing.

The new regime starts in three months.

Do you seek employment elsewhere?

My answer: No, not immediately. I would definitely give this a chance. Who doesn't like to get all spiffed up? And I think I could get used to female co-workers in ball gowns and prom dresses. If this became an issue, and after a few months it might, I would begin looking elsewhere.


4.) At the age of thirty, you suffer a blow to the skull. The head trauma leaves you with a rare form of partial amnesia−though you are otherwise fine, you’re completely missing five years from your life. You have no memory of anything that happened between the ages of twenty-three and twenty-eight. That period of your life is completely gone; you have no recollection of anything that occurred during that five-year gap.

You are told by friends and family that−when you were twenty-five−you (supposedly) became close friends with someone you met on the street. You possess numerous photos of you and this person, and everyone in your life insists that this individual was your best friend for over two years. You were (allegedly) inseparable. In fact, you find several old letters and e-mails from this person that vaguely indicate you may have even shared a brief romantic relationship. But something happened between you and this individual when you were twenty-seven, and the friendship abruptly ended (and−apparently−you never told anyone what caused this schism, so it remains a mystery to all). The friend moved away soon after the incident, wholly disappearing from your day-to-day life. But you have no memory of any of this. Within the context of your own mind, this person never even existed. There is tangible proof that you deeply loved this friend, but−whenever you look at their photograph−all you see is a stranger.

Six weeks after your accident, you are informed that this person has suddenly died.

How sad do you feel?

My answer: Initially, no, but eventually I would definitely feel sad. I'd be sad that I would never know what this friendship was like and what caused the schism.



5.) You have been wrongly accused of a horrific crime. Due to a bizarre collision of unfortunate circumstances and insane coincidences, it appears that you have murdered a prominent U.S. Senator, his beautiful young wife, and both of their infant children. Now, you did not do this, but you are indicted and brought to trial.

Predictably, the criminal proceedings are a national sensation (on par with the 1994 O.J. Simpson trial). It’s on television constantly, and it’s the lead story in most newspapers for almost a year. The prosecuting attorney is a charming genius; sadly, your defense team lacks creativity and panache. To make matters worse, the jury is a collection of easily confused sheep. You are found guilty and sentenced to four consecutive life terms with virtually no hope for parole (and−since there were no procedural mistakes during the proceedings−an appeal is hopeless).

This being the case you are (obviously) disappointed.

However, as you leave the courtroom (and in the days immediately following the verdict), something becomes clear: the “court of public opinion” has overwhelmingly found you innocent. Over 95% percent of the country believes you are not guilty. Noted media personalities have declared this scenario “the ultimate legal tragedy.” So you are going to spend the rest of your life amidst the general population of a maximum-security prison . . . but you are innocent, and everyone seems to know this.

Does this knowledge make you feel (a) better (b) no different, or (c) worse?

My answer: Maybe this is a cop out, but I would say that this would make me feel simultaneously better and worse. Better because the overhwelmingly majority would be on my side, but worse because there's nothing that anyone can do about it. Also, did anyone else notice that this is kind of the reverse of what happened to O.J.? Maybe that was the whole point.



6.) You are offered a Brain Pill. If you swallow this pill, you will become 10 percent more intelligent than you currently are; you will be more adept at reading comprehension, logic, and critical thinking. However, to all other people you know (and to all future people you meet), you will seem 20 percent less intelligent. In other words, you will immediately become smarter, but the rest of the world will perceive you as dumber (and there is no way you can ever alter the universality of that perception).

Do you take this pill?

My answer: No way. It's sad really, but perception (how competent people think you are) is a lot more important than reality (how competent you actually are).



7.) You begin watching a new television series, and you immediately find yourself strongly relating to one of the supporting characters. You’ve never before experienced a TV character that seems so similar to yourself; this fictional person dresses, behaves, and talks exactly like you. And−slowly, over the course of several episodes−the similarity grows spooky; on two separate occasions, the character recounts personal anecdotes that happened in your real life. The actor portraying this character begins mimicking your mannerisms. In at least three different episodes, the character’s dialogue quotes things you’ve said (verbatim) during casual conversation.

You become convinced that this is neither coincidence nor mental illness: somehow, this character is being actively based on your life. The show’s writers generally depict the “you” character in a positive manner, but−as far you can tell−you don’t know anyone involved in the show’s production or creation. It’s totally inexplicable.

You have two friends who also watch this show. One of them is certain that your theory is correct and that (somehow) the character is, in fact, based on your life. She tells you to get a lawyer. The second friend concedes that many of the similarities are amazing, but that the whole notion is ridiculous, impossible, and egocentric. He tells you to see a therapist.

How do you respond to this situation? Do you do anything?

My answer: What I find most interesting about this question is that most people generally like to think that this happens to them all of the time. Either a character acts just like them, a movie should be made about their life (Truman Show style), or a song completely sums up their feelings for a particular person or sitatuation and it was almost as if the artist wrote it for them. That said, this seems like enough evidence to go on to do something. I'd like to speak to the writers/creator to see how they came up with this particular character. If the only way to do that was to hire a lawyer I guess I'd do that, but I wouldn't want to sue for any compensation. I'd be much more interested in where they got the idea for this particular character than I would be in somehow capitalizing financially on this.



8.) You are placed in the unenviable position of having to compete for the right to stay alive. You will be matched against a person of your own gender in a series of five events−an 800-meter run, a game of Scrabble, a three-round boxing match, a debate over the legalization of late-term abortion (scored and officiated by reputable collegiate judges), and the math portion of the SAT.

In order to survive, you must win three of these events (your opponent will be playing for his or her life as well). However, you (kind of) get to pick your opponent: you can either (a) compete against a person selected at random, or (b) you can compete against someone who is exactly like you. If selected at random, the individual could be of any age or skill level−he/she might be an infant with Down syndrome, but he/she might also be an Academic All-American linebacker from Notre Dame. If you pick “the average human,” he/she will be precisely your age and will have an identical level of education, and the person will be a perfect cross-section of your particular demographic−he/she will be of average height and of average weight, with a standard IQ and the most normative life experience imaginable.

So whom do you select? Or−perhaps more accurately−do you feel that you are better than an average version of yourself?

My answer: First things first, I think I'd be pretty confident either way. I'm faster than the average male my age, I'm a pretty good Scrabble player, I'm confident in my pro-choice argument, and I got a 740 on the math portion of the SAT. That said, I think I'd pick the random because my odds would be better that I'd get someone from 0-16 or 65-80. If that were the case I would dominate all 5 events against the young person and at least the race and boxing match against the elderly person. I'd take my chances at beating the elderly person in Scrabble, debate, or the math portion of the SAT. I think taking an average version of myself is a much bigger risk because that way no event is an automatic win.



9.) It is 1933. You are in Berlin, Germany. Somehow, you find yourself in a position where you can effortlessly steal Adolf Hitler’s wallet. This theft will not affect Hitler’s rise to power, the nature of World War II, or the Holocaust. There is no important identification in the wallet, but the act will cost Hitler forty Reichsmarks and completely ruin his evening. You do not need the money. The odds that you will be caught committing this crime are less than 2 percent.

Are you ethically obligated to steal Hitler’s wallet?

My answer: Yes, no questions asked. The impulse for vengeance in that moment (as small as it might be) would be much more powerful than the notion of treating your neighbor how you want to be treated.



10.) While traveling on business, your spouse (whom you love) is involved in a plane crash over the Pacific Ocean. It is assumed that everyone onboard has died. For the next seven months, you quietly mourn. But then the unbelievable happens: it turns out your spouse has survived. He/She managed to swim to a desert island, where he/she lived in relative comfort with one other survivor (they miraculously located most of the airfcraft’s supplies on the beach, and the island itself was filled with ample food sources). Against all odds, they have just been discovered by a Fijian fishing boat.

The two survivors return home via a helicopter, greeted by the public as media sensations. Immediately upon their arrival, there is an international press conference. And during this press conference, you cannot help but notice how sexy the other survivor is; physically he/she perfectly embodies the type of person your mate is normally attracted to. Moreover, the intensity of the event has clearly galvanized a relationship between the two crash victims: they spend most of the interview explaining how they could not have survived without the other person’s presence. They explain how they passed the time by telling anecdotes from their respective lives, and both admit to having virtually given up on the possibility for rescue. At the end of the press conference, the two survivors share a tearful good-bye hug. It’s extremely emotional.

After the press conference, you are finally reunited with your spouse. He/She embraces you warmly and kisses you deeply.

How long do you wait before asking if he/she was ever unfaithful to you on this island? Do you never ask? And if you mate’s answer is “yes,” would that (under these specific circumstances) be acceptable?

My answer: I would never ask (it just doesn't seem right), but if my wife admitted that she did I would deem the act acceptable under the extreme circumstances.