This pet project is just my opinion based on the lifestyles of the subjects profiled.
Sewing Circle is a phrase used to describe the underground, closeted lesbian and bisexual film actresses and their relationships in Hollywood, particularly during Hollywood’s golden age from the 1910s to the 1950s. The actress Alla Nazimova coined this usage. Some of the actresses that I will be profiling in this series were rumored or admitted lesbians. The remainder were childless and/or unmarried throughout their lives. Since women can have several reasons for not having children, this does not prove anything. Decide for yourself.
NOTE: I am only profiling actresses who were prominent enough in their day to have a relatively detailed Wikipedia page (including a photo.) There are many more secondary and character actresses who could be added to the list.
Continue reading “The Sewing Circle (Part 2)”
This article is just my opinion based on the lifestyles of the subjects profiled.
“Sewing Circle” is a phrase used to describe the underground, closeted lesbian and bisexual film actresses of Hollywood, particularly during Hollywood’s golden age from the 1910s to the 1950s. The actress Alla Nazimova (godmother of former first lady Nancy Reagan) was the one credited with coining the term. Many of the actresses that I will be profiling in this series were rumored or admitted lesbians. The remainder were childless and/or unmarried throughout their lives. Since women can have several reasons for not having children, this does not prove anything. You may decide for yourself. Keep in mind, though, that over the course of the 19th century, the average American woman gave birth to six children, not including children lost to miscarriages and stillbirths. And globally, up to 1965, the average woman had more than five children.
None of the birth control methods of the 19th century (aside from infanticide and abortion) were particularly effective, and none of them were new. Withdrawal by the male, douching and vaginal suppositories were around in ancient times and common in the 19th century. In 1838 condoms and diaphragms were produced with vulcanized rubber. It was second in popularity to withdrawal but was not advocated as birth control. Instead, it was to be used to prevent venereal disease. The most effective form of birth control was (and still is) abstaining from sexual intercourse (with men).
Continue reading “The Sewing Circle – (Part 1)”
Needing to get away from the Perón‘s (there is one more segment to follow with another startling discovery from Richard Juckes), I decided to do something quick and dirty. Somewhere I saw a photo of Sylvester Stallone playing polo. That’s not a big deal, as the man is very athletic. But it is incongruent. Stallone is said to be from Hell’s Kitchen and a broken home one who did odd jobs like cleaing animal cages to make his living as a youth. Polo is a difficult sport that takes years of practice to be good. Stallone has described it as like playing golf during an earthquake.
Continue reading “The Italian Stallion grew up in hell’s kitchen, where he excelled at polo”
“Their sexual profile is, possibly, part of the in vitro neutering procedures I suspect in use that then produce gay or latent assets who won’t be burdened by actual family obligations. (That last bit is pure speculation but a useful placeholder until I can get to the bottom of this) I suspect their contributing biological parents are cousins, the mothers themselves illegitimate, thus certain physical traits, like height or lack thereof, become pronounced amid this milieu.” (Tyrone McCloskey, Cold Blood and Weak Tea)
Tyrone’s words came to mind as I read Kevin’s piece below, mostly because of the words “…until I get to the bottom of this.” I too would like to get to the bottom of this – we’ve dabbled about the edges with Matt Damon and the Bokanovsky Brats. There is something going on here with the breeding and selection of talent that graces our music and entertainment industries, young brats selected at a very young age (perhaps even in vitro) and given an automatic ticket to stardom.
Kevin did not set out to write about Jennifer Connelly, and all of the writers here know about this experience – we just stumble into things and can’t let go. Over at Fakeologist there is a short video up showing a part of the Zapruder film, and in it can plainly be seen that JFK before the road sign is not the same person as JFK after the road sign. I only mention that because a person of interest turns up in the comments there and is given a royal and unique Terran Downvale treatment – Jim Henson, who also turns up in Kevin’s piece below. Terran, it seems, also has trouble letting go of things.
Kevin tells me he is thinking about starting his own blog, and this piece would not fit with his plans, so offers it to us here. He has also been featured prominently in the past by Miles Mathis, the most recent on faith healers.
Without further adieu …
Continue reading “Jennifer Connelly – a Beautiful Lie”
A few years back I was alive with the excitement of a discovery that changed my outlook, that “Paul McCartney” was actually two men, a set of twins. Once I got a thorough immersion in their faces, they became easily to tell apart, so that I can easily see that today’s Paul McCartney is actually “Mike,” though we do not have the luxury of knowing their real names.
That information in tow, I put together a (in retrospect, sloppy) blog post on the matter, and submitted it to Miles Mathis. He rejected it as not up to standards, which I easily accepted, as I was indeed a newbie. At a certain point in the succeeding conversation he suggested one flaw in my writing: “You make too many assumptions.”
Continue reading “Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions …”
I was not prepared to accept this comment from XE on first reading. It sat uncomfortably even as I know I can be fooled, and have been time and again.
I watched the movie Grizzly Man in 2005, and we met Timothy Treadwell at a lecture in either Bozeman or Billings, Montana. That created personal interest. What I wrote before was the result of twelve-year-old memories.
Back then I did not watch movies with a discerning eye. I still thought jets flew through buildings like a knife through butter. I thought that elections were real, that news was essentially a (distorted) reflection of reality, and that a movie labeled “documentary” by its makers would be an honest enterprise.
I had to watch the movie again, and did yesterday afternoon.
Continue reading “Grizzly deaths”
This essay contains medical information that might be construed as advice. It is not, but rather just long-winded opinion. Read it at your own risk.
Zombies on the Brain
In this piece I will proffer a novel thesis. And like every argument, I start from certain premises—things that one accepts without trying to prove.
I hold this truth to be self-evident: that the most awesome of all movie monsters ever are sword-wielding skeletons. I will drop anything to watch the scene from the 1963 classic Jason and the Argonauts in which the
Claymation Dynamation skeletons rise from the soil to attack Jason and his men. I also stipulate to the nearly equal awesomeness of CGI skeletons. [Edit: see comments below]
The other cinematic monsters leave me cold. Vampires? They suck. Werewolves? What’s the big hairy deal? Mummies? There’s more wick than wickedness about them. Godzilla and Rodan? Hardly rad to me. You can keep your demon-possessed dolls, your poltergeists, and your ghosts. The Terminator is alright, but just because under the ugly Arnold-skin is a bitchin’ metallic skeleton. Continue reading “Avast, We Scurvy Dogs!”