Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

Regular readers of the Rant will know I am not a fan of religion generally, and the actions of some religious institutions make me an grumpy fellow. Near the top of that list is the Catholic Church. Its views on sexual health, women, and a handful of other issues cause real harm and suffering and should not be glossed over because believers really believe in the goodness of the church.

When the present pope was elected, I had a few harsh words to say about it. Harsh, but I think I deserved. No man who claims, as Pope Francis does, that gay marriage is a tool of the devil  set to ruin mankind is going to get my respect.

So it was with some surprise that I read that Francis said heathens like me get to go to heaven even if we are non-believers provided that we are good people who help others.

As an atheist and someone who values logic and evidence above just about everything else, the concept of the afterlife has about all the real world relevance of a debate over who wins in a fight between the Hulk and Thor. (Psst. The answer is Thor.) Still, it was a shocking point of view coming from the mouth of a Catholic traditionalist like Francis. His point seemed to be that what mattered is not what you profess to believe but how you behave. That goodness and kindness and compassion is what matters, not what flag once carries be it Catholic or atheist or anything else he said:

“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

While the concepts of heaven and metaphysical redemption mean less than nothing to me, I was still impressed that a pope would make such a clear statement that encouraged positive moral and ethical behaviour free from theological chains. It mean, taken as he said it, that good people are brothers and sisters regardless of their religious attitudes and will meet in heaven when the game is over.

It was certainly a statement I could get behind and was all set to write a column saying “maybe this Pope guy isn’t the jerk I thought I he was. Maybe I am wrong about this guy.”

But this is the Catholic Church we are talking about, so this was all too good to last. Within a couple of days the Vatican released an “explanatory” statement. Of course his popeiness didn’t REALLY mean atheists get to go to heaven just because they are good, the Vatican says. Atheists are still hell bound unless they accept Jesus and the Catholic Church:

“The Rev. Thomas Rosica, a Vatican spokesman, said that people who aware of the Catholic church “cannot be saved” if they “refuse to enter her or remain in her … Rosica also said that Francis had “no intention of provoking a theological debate on the nature of salvation,” during his homily on Wednesday.”

So there you go. Even when the church says something important, something that could do some real good by ending some animosity between believers and non-believers, as an organization it still manages to shoot itself in the foot. With a bazooka.

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

So my latest Rant about Don Cherry’s cave man idea about barring female reporters from NHL locker rooms has struck a nerve with many readers, most of them rising to the defense of Grapes, some missing the point entirely and a few setting a new standard for the burning stupid.

Several readers, whom I cannot help but picture twirling a mustache while shouting “Ah ha! Gotcha LaFleche!” commented that women should not be allowed in NHL locker rooms since men are not allowed to do post game interviews with female athletes in their locker rooms. Well, sorry to break it to you fellas, but male reporters do post game interviews for females sports from the locker room all the time. It is a regular occurrence, for instance, in the WNBA.

There is a general theme among those who commented on the Rant that there will be naked bodies in the locker room and reporters who are in there are either there to be peeping toms or will be shattered mentally should they witness the naked human form. Letting women in NHL locker rooms is an affront to basic decency, they say. Let a male reporter into a female locker room post game just goes too far! Soon, reporters will be asking for access to the bathrooms, says one reader.

Well the problem here is that interviews are not conducted in the shower stalls, and where the players get undressed and cleaned up etc. is, in modern NHL locker rooms, kept separate from the area that reporters get access too. Things have changed a lot since Cherry was an NHL coach. Yah, there will from time to time be a player in a towel and a naked butt seen, but by in large, it’s a non-issue. There will, of course, be the occasional moron who acts like  pig, but that player needs to be called out for that sort of behavior rather that barring the female reporter from doing her job. Which is the point. The problem isn’t the reporter, the problem is a minority of players who act like idiots.

Some readers trying to be fair want reporters, men and women, out of the locker room entirely. Yet the reason that reporters champ at the bit to get into the locker rooms is because news outlets work on tight deadlines. Getting post game reaction quickly has been a staple of coverage for decades. Reporters might have 30 minutes or so to get interviews done, finish a story and send it to their editors. The relationship between NHL teams and reporters has been built on this arrangement for ages and there really isn’t any outcry or need to change it.

Others still say by criticizing Cherry, I’m being “politically correct” and if Cherry’s politics were left of centre instead of right, no columnist would say a peep about his idea of kicking female journalists out of the locker room. Poppycock. As I have noted before, I pretty well take aim and everyone at some point or another, and usually when that happens, I am labeled as a supporter of the other side. Criticize a liberal, I’m a conservative. A conservative, I’m a liberal and so on. The fact of the matter is that if anyone, Liberal or Tory, came out and said female journalists should be barred from doing their jobs, I’d have written exactly the same thing.

Finally, there is a comment that is perhaps the most bizarre feedback I have ever received. By criticizing what Cherry said, we’re told, I am merely a puppet of my university professors. (I was unaware the political studies department at Bishop’s University was so focused on the conduct of female sports reporters and the athletes they cover. I must have missed that course.) And in fact by speaking up for the right of my peers to do their jobs I am attempting to transform Canada into communist China. Apparently, criticism of Don Cherry is evidence of being a Marxist and therefore, makes me a traitor to the nation who seeks to destroy families. I’d explain that further, but frankly it doesn’t make sense to me either.

The bottom line is that Cherry was wrong. Reporters, male and female, have a job to do and preventing them doing it on the basis of gender is discriminatory nonsense.

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

So I thought it was just the last week of April, but apparently its yet another “official” week. This time, rail safety week. You know, CN and the like are reminding you not to jump in front of trains. Which seems like common sense, but I’ve covered dozens of deaths of people who has stood in the path a locomotive. So apparently the reminder is necessary.

And, in the spirit of the week, I figured it was a good time to repost “Dumb Ways to Die.” Play safe around trains, ranters!

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

Do you smell it? That stench in the air, wafting it’s away down from Ottawa? The unmistakable stink of fear.

It seems that the governing Conservative Party is very, very afraid. Now, I know I am coming to the party late on this – I was off sick last week, so sue me – but it is more obvious than a rodeo clown in Victoria Secret’s fashion show that the Tories have long been unnerved by the prospect of having to go head-to-head with a Justin Trudeau lead Liberal Party in an election.

How do we know? Well, the party had a series of attack ads loaded and ready to go the moment Trudeau was named Liberal leader. No sooner than Trudeau’s arm was raised than the first ad hit the airwaves declaring the little fella a silly know-nothing with all the leadership acumen of your average gerbil.

No election is on the horizon. The Tories have a majority, so no need to fret about the a vote of non confidence or Harper giving the MPs another time out when he isn’t getting his way.

So why put so much effort in trying to define the new Liberal leader right out of the gate? It’s rather odd at first blush because I am not sure anyone really knows what to make of Trudeau yet. I sure don’t.

It is not just that he is untried as a leader. I have no idea what the guy stands for. Or what his vision of the country is. Or where he would go on a host of policy issues. Nothing about Trudeau has ever left an impression on me one way or the other, to be frank about it. He is neither too nice, nor a jerk. Some of his ideas, like his comments after the Boston Marathon bombings, are close to being right while also being damn wrong. In total, he actually leaves no impression. Love him or hate him, you could not say the same about his famous father when he was the leader of the Liberals.

So if an election was called today, it’s hard to see Trudeau  as a legit threat to Harper over the span of a campaign.

But then, I don’t think the Tories are scared of Trudeau as he is now, but as he might be given time. He’s isn’t stupid, he’s young and good looking, younger Canadians and women seem like him a lot more than they do Harper. With some seasoning, he could potentially lead a resurgent Liberals against a tired Conservative party and a crumbling NDP.  That is what the Tories fear. A new Trudeuamania that recovers the party’s losses from the NDP in Quebec and gains ground in Ontario. So the Conservatives are trying to define Trudeau with transparently silly attack ads.

I don’t know how effective they will be, though. Trudeau is enough of a cipher that I suspect the ads will roll off most Canadian’s backs. Or they could backfire, giving Trudeau attention that, if they had not released the ads, he would not have. To make grounds for his party, Trudeau needs his name out there and the no-so-subtle-school-yard mockery of the ads are doing that for him for free. Plus, Canadians have grown weary of attack ads. The ones the Tories rolled out against Michael Ignatieff before the last election had less to do with the Liberals crushing defeat than did Ignatieff himself, who pushed the Liberals too far left, had all the personal warmth of  an angry barracuda, and held strangely sloppy policy ideas.

In any case, expect to smell the stench of fear, and more attack ads, for a while longer.

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

Grant Rant Fact: I’m a geek. It’s just the way it is. Yes, I box, I was a varsity football football player and I am the closet thing this burg has to Clark Kent (see what I mean?), but deep down in my soul beats the heart of the geek.

I was a sick a lot as a kid, and spent a ridiculous amount of time reading, well, pretty much anything I could get my hands on. Novels. Magazines. Text books. Comic books.

Superheroes in particular appealed to me, probably for the same reasons they appeal to most kids. But there were two things that always puzzled me. Why did so many male superheroes wear their underwear over their pants (a trend that has, mercifully come to an end for the most part) and why was it that that most female superheroes fought crime in their swim suits? (A trend that has not changed at all.)

Look, I get that superheroes are fantasy and wish fulfillment, and as such, the heroes themselves are hyper idealized depictions of the human form. So the men are ridiculously muscled and square jawed. The women are ridiculously sexy in appearance. I’m not a prude, I just don’t get why Wonder Woman can’t have a shirt or, you know, pants.

(Actually she did at one point recently, when her outfit was redesigned to keep it’s original flavour, but gave her pants and a jacket. Fanboy outcry was insane. Apparently, it makes total sense to many of my fellow geeks that a woman would fight crime in a one-piece and go-go boots.)

Still, ridiculous costumes aside, the world of superheroes at least boasts rosters of powerful female characters, who generally speaking, kick all kinds of ass. As a general rule, they don’t need rescuing or a man to prop up their self worth. Most of them would drop kick you to the moon for suggesting it. Wonder Woman, Black Canary, Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk, Black Widow, Batgirl (particularly when written by the brilliant Gail Simone) …the list goes on.

These chumps had better have a good dental plan….

The really unfortunate thing that is that because comic readers still tend to be men (although the demographic has and is shifting all the time as more women become readers and creators), so these characters don’t get the exposure they deserve and  young girls, in particular, don’t get to see them as much as they should.

So with all that as background, particularly the “roster of powerful women characters” thing, I ask: What the hell is this? A line of Marvel Comics  t-shirts for kids has two types: one for boys, one for girls.

The one for boys, features the Avengers with the slogan, “Be a Hero.” Awesome. Positive message. Good stuff.

The one of the girls also features the Avengers, but with the slogan, “Need a hero”. Um…Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot!

Really? So boys can BE heroes but the girls NEED a hero? Not only does this send a totally wrong message to girls, it basically spits in the eye of everything female characters in Marvel comic books stands for. You don’t see stories where the Black Widow is sitting about going “I guess I could save the world single highhandedly, but what I really need is a man to do the hero thing for me so I can just look hot in my black catsuit and guns.”

This is what she tends to do instead:

“Needs a hero”???? It’s just so….gah! Come on! It’s 2013! Did I mention it’s 2013?!?

Nuff’ said.

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

Although I do not believe in a god per se (although I occasionally consider becoming a Thorist, only because I would get to carry around a sweet hammer and take Thursday’s off work) I do sometimes think the universe itself has something of a mind of its own. And that mind is mostly bent on playing jokes on sentient creatures. You know, black holes, colliding stars and ensuring the internet if home to some really, flaming hot burning stupid.

Lately, for reasons that escape me, the interweb appears to be hell bent on giving me advice to talk to women. Not saying I, like every other living male on the planet, couldn’t use the help, but even as a dumb Y chromosome, I know the burning stupid when I see it.

By way of a for instance, I encountered one the other day on Facebook that suggested one should not look at a woman’s eyes when talking to her, but instead stare at her mouth. Because instead of being super creepy, that will make her want to have sex with you. And by “have sex with you” I think the author probably meant, “flee from you and possibly considering a restraining order.”

Today’s sample, linked to the bottom of a new article I reading about public health in the United States (because, you know, these are related subjects) was 15 tips for men on how to talk to women. So, as a thought experiment, I decided to take the advice seriously and literally as though one was on a first date.

1) “You should talk about “emotional” topics like childhood memories, future ambitions, or her passions”

“Oh, one of my most powerful childhood memories is that time my cousin was chewed up by that combine harvester. It was a sad day. In the future, I want to lead a revolution to destroy all combine harvesters, for they are evil tools of the devil. Are you passionate about cheese?”

2) Women want a guy who is not afraid to lead her. While talking to a woman take control of the conversation. Never wait for her to dictate what you’ll be talking about.

“We WILL talk about combine harvesters. What? You want to talk about your job? pfffttt. I’m the man and I am dictating we talk about combine harvesters, woman!”

3) Pay attention to the non-verbal cues a woman is giving you. If you’re standing too close to her, accidentally spitting when you talk, or making her feel uncomfortable in any way… she will send you hints. Pay attention to them.

“You keep pushing me back and spraying perfume in my mouth…are you trying to send me a non-verbal clue?”

4) Remember this motto “Fun not Funny.” Women are attracted to men who allow them to have fun. Don’t concentrate on having the funniest jokes.

“Since my cousin was chewed up by that combine harvester, I don’t have the funniest jokes. but I am fun. Let’s go play ‘ride down this hill in a car with no breaks.’ It’s a thrill ride, let me tell you.”

5) Tease women. One of the easiest ways to take a conversation to a fun and flirty level is to begin to tease women. Think back to your time on the playground. In the world of dating… what worked on the playground is effective all over again.

“Hmmm…you are using that non verbal clue of pushing me again. I was only flirting when I pulled your hair like that….like a kid on the playground…huh, you are balling up your fist…another non-verbal clue?”

6) Get intimate with her. Women are turned on by men who are not afraid to take a conversation to a personal, intimate level.

“I am not afraid to talk about my cousin and the combine harvester. Lets have sex.”

7) Use things like “cold reads” to turn women on. Women love to hear opinions about themselves. Tell her what you observe about her.

“By the state of your shoes, ridiculously expensive purse, leather pants and over done finger nails, I deduce you are a stuck up princess who thinks that money and expensive things solve problems and give meaning to your otherwise shallow existence. Also, your body language gives away the fact that you don’t like a guy with onion breath…but please put that perfume away. Are you turned on my observations of you? Lets have sex.”

8) Avoid complimenting a woman too much. Women are turned off by men who come across as “needy.” If you are complimenting a woman too much she will think you’re trying to impress her. Which will have the opposite effect.

“You’re mildly OK, looking.”

9) If you want to know how to talk to women in a way that doesn’t bore them… Avoid asking too many “interview” style questions.  Instead state your opinion about things.

“I hate combine harvesters. They are evil.”

10) Remember: Statements over questions. Instead of saying “where did you grow up?” Say “You don’t look like you grew up around here.” This allows you to make observations about her and express your personality.

“You don’t look like you have any level of higher education.”

11) Don’t hide your identity.

“I’m Batman.”

12) Never compliment her on her eyes, looks, or body.

“I have no relevant opinion on your eyes, looks or body. But that woman over there is smokin’.”

13) Say something that lets her know that you view her in a “sexual” way.

“Lets have sex.”

14)  Use conversation “games” to keep the mood fun and flirtatious. Games can be anything like “truth or dare” or to less extreme games like the “5 questions game”.

“Let’s play truth or dare, because that isn’t totally creepy on a first date when you are nearing 40….”

15) Don’t give away your hand so fast. Women like men who are a challenge. If you want to keep a woman’s interest she has to feel like she is slowly winning you over. If she thinks you’re too easy… she’ll lose interest.

“I’m Batman.”

—–

So there you have it. The Grant Rant guide to talking to women based on advice from the internet. Just follow that pattern and you are sure to find the woman of your dreams, boys….or a black eye and a few busted teeth. You know, whichever comes first.

Greetings web denizens, heathens, zealots and the rest of you!

Ok, so by now you have probably heard about the dust up in Toronto with Mayor Rob Ford and the alleged grabbing of a woman’s backside?

In terms of actual interest, I rank this entire affair along side watching one’s own beard grow. But what really burns me is that some reporters have decided to label this “Assgate.” You know, like Watergate, only with an ass in place of…well, water I guess.

Look, my fellow journalists, “gate” is not a suffix. It never was. It never shall be. A gate is doorway through a fence. It is not another word for “scandal.”

The reason the scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon was called Watergate is because it started with a break-in at the Watergate Hotel. Watergate is the name of the place. Using “gate” the way some of my unthinking comrades do would mean that Nixon’s presidency was brought low by a scandal involving H2O.

But for reasons that escape me, although if I was guessing I would venture the answer is “journalists being completely lazy”, since Watergate any sort of political scandal gets saddled with the suffix “gate”.

Honestly, any journalist who uses “gate” to mean “scandal” should go outside and kick his own ass.