Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, etc.

What we have today is a video. It's a video that is without splick. That is to say, it is inexplicable. Actually, the video itself isn't so bad. It's the song that accompanies said video that I'm having a problem with. And it could be that I just don't get it. I'm not dismissing any possibilities. But I really think that I am being fairly accurate when I say that this might be one of the biggest piece of crap songs that I have ever heard in my life and I cannot for the life of me understand how in the world the video has garnered over 19 million hits on YouTube AND has made it into the top fifty downloads on iTunes! Since Blogger is being super fabulous this evening and may or may not be letting me put up the video (check at the bottom of this post to see if it's here), you might just have to click on the YouTube link above to check out this atrocity. I'll wait.

Are you back? How are your ears? Have you stabbed them out with sporks yet? The chick singing is a one thirteen year old Rebecca Black. And that brings me to some of my questions. (Trust me, there isn't enough room here for all of my questions.) Question one: Why does she feel to sing a song that is basically telling us the days of the week and the mundane-mess of her days? And in such a matter of fact way. She gets up. She goes downstairs. She eats cereal. And then comes the real pickle of her day...trying to make that gut wrenching decision as to whether she should sit in the front seat or the back seat! Then comes our lesson on the days of the week. Well, most of them. Thursday comes before Friday. After Friday is Saturday. After Saturday is Sunday. Thank God that her week in her song only seems to have four days as I don't think that I could have stomached hearing about Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday! Seriously, I've heard songs that were basically about nothing, but this takes nothing-ness to a whole new level.

But wait! There's more! Suddenly, right in the middle of this debacle, a 30-year old rapper (for some reason) pops up in the middle of the video and begins his own matter-of-fact lyrics about absolutely nothing. Then after he's done, it's back to the thirteen year old white girl to continue singing about how it is Friday and "We so excited...We gonna have a ball today." Painful lyrics and poor grammar. Fabulous. What's with the rapper? What's he driving? Why is he having anything at all to do with a little 13-year old white chick? He seems to be chasing down the middle schoolers in the bus so that he can party it up with them. Why? Because it's Friday, that is correct.

I can only assume that this is some sort of quest to try to find the next Justin Bieber or something like that? I don't know where else this chick came from, nor do I particularly care. I wish that she'd go back there and take her song with her, though. And I don't necessarily care what day of the week that she does it on. She doesn't even need to sing to me about it. Even though she probably would and it would probably go something like this: "And Mary didn't care for me or my little song. So I went back from whence I came. My song was never played again. Not even on Friday. Or the day after that, which happens to be Saturday. Or the day after that, which I will tell you is Sunday. Now I am going to go upstairs to my room and never come out again. I don't know what to tell you about the rapper. My Dad wants to hurt and maim him, though. I think I smell biscuits."

Single Children Put Some Clothes On It

The video below disturbs me in more ways than one. Don't get me wrong. I'm not against showing a little skin. It's not like I'm a member of the FLDS or anything like that. Skin is good. Let me rephrase that. Adult skin is good. Why must people insist on letting their children parade around like hooker-ific pole dancers? It's not attractive. It's disgusting and disturbing. Seriously, folks. When allowing your small children to re-enact Beyonce's "Single Ladies (Put A Ring On It)" (a fabulous little ditty, by the way), I think that the rule of thumb should be that they have to be wearing at least as much clothes as Beyonce was wearing. Would that be so bad?

Actually, now that I think about it, I have a couple of rules I'd like to implement. We've already gone over the first one, you must be covering the same ratio of your body as Beyonce is covering hers. Rule number two: Do not dress your children (especially those whose ages appear to still be in single digits) in something that a horny boyfriend would buy for his girlfriend after stopping by a 7-11 on his way home on Valentine's Day. What in the world are those girls wearing? I didn't know that you could get five dollar hooker outfits that small. If I can't see Beyonce's midriff, I don't want to see your seven-year old girl's midriff, either. Got it? For God's sake, I hope so.

Rule number three: If you do not have anything to shake, please don't try to shake it anyway. Clearly, these girls are not quite at the breasticle stage yet. There's nothing to shake. And that's FINE!! Yet, there they are, shaking their money makers when they don't even have change, let alone real money.

Rule number four: This one pertains mainly to this example only. The song basically talks about if some dude likes what he sees, perhaps he should "put a ring on it" if it's that important to him. Marry the chick, for cryin' out loud, is the message here. I don't know that you can have that message be spewed by little girls dressed in cheap lingerie who look as if they're all missing a brass pole or two. Seriously. Who are you people who are letting your kid do this and who are you people who are cheering these girls on?

Listen, the girls are talented. They have great dance moves. But why are they darn near naked? These are little girls! Where are their fathers? (Or their mothers, for that matter. But I'm really surprised that Dads would let their little girls prance around like that.) My Dad sure as hell would never have let me wear anything like that in public when I was eight OR when I was thirty, for that matter. I'd be a little afraid to wear anything like that now, lest he come back from beyond the grave and haunt me and my scantily clad booty for dressing like a ho. My brother (who is 3 years younger than me) is raising his step-daughter by himself (don't ask) and he's told her she's not dating until she's eighty. (He tells her that as he's cleaning his gun.) She certainly isn't walking out of his house looking like those girls do. She's kind of lucky he lets her walk out of the house at all (she's gonna be hot).

Seriously, why couldn't they have had on leotards or one piece swim suits or something? (After viewing that, I'm kind of leaning toward parkas, but they seem like they'd be rather bulky to dance in. See? I'm not unreasonable about the whole thing, nor impractical!) Why do they have to look like there is a midget hooker and pole dancer convention in town? Cover up your children when they're in public. Please. There's enough sexual exposure out there in all forms of media that they're going to be saturated with beginning at birth. Hypersexualizing the kids themselves by allowing them to parade their bodies in public when they are SEVEN years old can't lead to anything that's going to be great, I'll tell you that.

Again, I think that they're fabulous dancers. They're all very talented. However, the outfits that they are wearing are inappropriate and disturbing. And do you know what would have happened if they had wore outfits that were just a touch more modest (ie, I'm not looking at a 7-year old's belly button)? The ONLY thing that everyone would be talking about was how awesome the dance was. And that's how it should have been. Instead, the obvious talent that is there is lost and under-appreciated because all you can focus on is all of the sex that is there. It's sad, really. I can only hope that it won't be sadder for them as they get older.