Navy’s awesome 23-21 victory over 19th-ranked Notre Dame last week gives me a great excuse to get active again in the Rule 5 community with this pic from the Navy Cheerleaders website:

Why is this the Rule 5 post I never would have expected to write? Women were still a novelty at USNA when I arrived. My class was only the third with women in it, and a lot of people weren’t happy that women were there at all, or at least were disturbed with what we saw as politically correct moves relating to specific female midshipmen.

In any event, we probably were more unkind than we should have been; in fact, my classmates and I were pretty damn crude, and let’s just say that we didn’t think good looks were plentiful among that early group of women who braved (and I do mean braved) the transition to a co-ed institution. We said some nasty things. Please accept my belated (and anonymous) apology, ladies from the classes of ‘80-’82.

Some “old-timers” I meet at alumni functions would still like to change the Academy back to an all-male institution. But I’m betting the young mid in the middle of this pic feels differently.

In two senses of the word: the ladies are conservative, and so are the photos. There’s no genuine cheesecake in the Claire Booth Luce Policy Institute’s 2010 wall calendar — not that you’d expect it.

But it does remind me of the not-so-long-ago blogburst about conservative women vs. liberal women. And for a good laugh, see how Doug Ross carries that theme a step further with a hypothetical face-off against a wall calendar featuring liberal women.

I also won’t be posting much original content this week; I’m swamped and I still haven’t honed what Stacy McCain calls one’s “blog-fu” to write well and quickly, so the time to write — at least to write the way I do — isn’t likely to be there this week.

So, perhaps it’s fortunate I have some catching up to do this week (per Rule 2) on returning linkage to some blogs that have recently linked me. Makes for some easy posting by sponging off others’ talents and returning a few favors at the same time. Sorry to be slow getting back to you No Sheeples Here, Troglopundit, Fishersville Mike, Moe Lane, Daley Gator, Another Black Conservative, Pundette, Classic Liberal, Eye of Polyphemus, Patriot Room, Sundries Shack, and Rhetorican. (Wow, I’m further behind than I thought!) I’ll be watching you extra close this week and the next for good stuff to pass along to my handful of regular readers. Don’t expect anything like an Instalanche, though.

Oh, and I might manage to squeeze in a Rule 5 post.

Christina Hendricks as Joan Holloway in Mad Men

Stacy McCain’s Rule 5 standard, Christina Hendricks — who plays bombshell secretary Joan Holloway on Mad Men — makes the following disclosure in the August 2009 Redbook magazine:

We have to ask: Are you a natural redhead?

I’m a natural blonde. I’ve been dyeing it red for more than 20 years. I’ve always felt like I was a natural redhead — like I was an imposter as a blonde.

Can’t see it. At all.

She looks absolutely stunning in the photos, but those small internet pics don’t do her justice. I know because my wife, a huge Mad Men fan, was kind enough to tear out the Redbook pages for me before she threw the magazine out. Ain’t my wife a peach?

UPDATE (7/22/09): Stacy McCain links from a post at Taki’s Magazine, giving me a Chris Matthews-like thrill from the resulting traffic spike, which illustrates a successful application of Rule 1: Shameless blogwhoring.

I emailed McCain a link to this post last night. And I didn’t even have to ask for a link. It pays to know a man’s weaknesses.

Thanks, Stacy!

UPDATE #2 (7/22/09): And thanks again! McCain links from his blog, too. Traffic spike grows larger. Thrills up both legs now:

(FYI, the smaller spike is from the last Rule 5 Sunday.)

UPDATE #3 (7/23/09): This is getting really, really fun. I thought yesterday’s traffic was good, but today’s is through the roof. I think the Wordpress line graph illustrates it better than the Sitemeter bar graph:

Skepticrats traffic for last 30 days

I am running out of appendages for thrills to run up. Thanks again, Stacy!

Now, if I can just write something clever that makes people want to stick around . . .

She had a very tough childhood, to say the least. Very rough living. A trashy look to go along with that hard living. Not my type of gal at all. Had I met her, I would have pitied her in her teens and probably found her distasteful when she was old enough to know better.

Yet, as an actress, she charms my socks off, and now she seems to have her stuff together (mostly). She is such a gifted comic actress, her portrayal of the wholesome Julia in The Wedding Singer made me forget all about her real life :

I also thought she was terrific in 50 First Dates and Never Been Kissed, also romantic comedies. In a far more serious role, in which she portrayed someone with a much tougher life, she was nonetheless charming in Riding in Cars with Boys, and you were cheering for her all the way to overcome the obstacles life placed in front of her character (and which, to some extent, her character invited).

Hats off to a charming actress, and wishing her the best.

So I tried a couple minutes of appearance on Letterman. Then I tried these clips from Two and Half Men.  Then this clip from Transformers. And after seeing her in action, all I can say is . . . meh.

Oh well, as a friend of mine used to say “That’s why Baskin-Robbins makes 31 flavors.”

Of course, I can be this critical because I’m the handsomest devil you’ll ever lay eyes on.

Actually, I don’t really mean to be critical of Megan Fox at all. She is attractive. Kind of. It’s Foxmania that has me baffled. Not that I’ve seen it specifically within the Rule 5 club. Which I hope I don’t get kicked out of.

UPDATE (7/12/09): Perhaps my Rule 5 club membership is safe after all. With well over 100 visits to this post so far today (thank you, Smitty and Classic Liberal), still no comment asking “are you effin’ crazy?” I was half expecting one or two death threats by now.

There is one terrific comment, though, from commenter John Higgins, and it’s too good to miss, so here it is in full:

I’m sorry, who is Megan Fox?

I do regular Rule 5 posts, too, and I promise one for next Sunday’s round-up. Until then, don’t be a stranger.

]]> http://www.skepticrats.com/2009/07/10/my-rule-5-heresy/feed/ 3 http://www.skepticrats.com/2009/06/29/rule-5-monday-wimbledon-edition/ http://www.skepticrats.com/2009/06/29/rule-5-monday-wimbledon-edition/#comments Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:28:11 +0000 Deuce Geary http://www.skepticrats.com/?p=1855 Want to play at Wimbledon’s Centre Court? Forget the tennis training and work on your make-up.

When it comes to choosing which women play on Centre Court, good looks count for more than big shots.

While a succession of easy-on-the-eye unknowns have appeared in Wimbledon’s prime arena, the top women’s seeds have been relegated to lesser courts.

***

A BBC source said: ‘It’s the Wimbledon play committee, not us who decides on the order of play.

‘But obviously it’s advantageous to us if there are good-looking women players on Centre Court.

‘No one has heard of many of the women now, so if they are pretty it definitely gives them an edge.

‘Our preference would always be a Brit or a babe as this always delivers high viewing figures.’

On Wednesday, Centre delivered exactly that  -  the so-called Battle of the Babes between unseeded Gisela Dulko (world ranking 45) and unseeded Maria Sharapova (ranking 60).

That would be this Maria Sharapova:

I think they may have a point.

UPDATE (7/3/09): With links coming in to this post from Grandpa John’s and No Sheeples Here, and Smitty’s Rule 5 Sunday round-up approaching (check last week’s round-up if you don’t know what I’m talking about), I decided the above picture wasn’t good enough. This post deserves more than that somber picture of her, and she has a terrific smile that should be included in this post:

There. That’s better.

I try not to post anything too risque in my Rule 5 posts, and you have no idea how hard it was to find a decent picture of Maria Sharapova smiling. All the large photos were cheesecake pics in bikinis or other skimpy outfits; the wholesome ones all seemed to be around 90 to 100 pixels on a side. I had to spend at least a half hour of going through cheesecake bikini Google Images results before I found this. It was a chore, but I gladly endured it for my readers. I hope you all appreciate the sacrifice.

There’s a lot to like about this “rock ‘n’ roll fable,” as I believe it was billed. Awesome soundtrack. Good versus evil. Motorcycles. Cool cars. Righteous violence. A manly and honorable lead male character. And a climactic fight between the good guy and the bad guy. Everything movie critics hate but real people like.

Oh, did I mention it has Diane Lane?

That’s Diane Lane as rock ‘n’ roll singer Ellen Aim. And boy, did she pull off that role! (Well, except for the lip syncing, but I’ll cut her a break for that, and this isn’t a Rule 5 audio post anyway.) By the end of the movie, the poster art seemed like only a slight exaggeration:

At least that’s the way it seemed to this 23-year-old Marine, who exited the theater practically drunk on the experience of the movie. Then again, maybe it was those beers my buddy and I drank beforehand. Whatever. This is a great flick with a hot chick. Highly recommended.

UPDATE (7/5/09): Why didn’t I think of this before all those folks hit Smitty’s link? Commenter Kitty points out that the closing number from the movie is on YouTube. That led me to the opening number, Nowhere Fast. Here it is:

If you’re wondering, yes, that face that materializes near the end is Willem Dafoe, as leader of the motorcycle gang.

Just in case anyone’s thinking about it.

This is just wrong on so many levels.

Obviously, someone, somewhere, thinks this look  is attractive. But I seriously doubt that includes anyone in the regular Rule 5 crowd.  Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

I’m not here to make fun of Swedish bodybuilder Irene Andersen’s, looks, I’m just wondering . . . why?

More power to her for going after the body she really wants, though. I wish I had her discipline.

I found this at Pravda via that widget that displays links to odd news at the top of the sidebar at Cassy Fiano’s blog, which is kind of funny, since Cassy has written about issues like weight, body image and the pressure on women to meet certain standards of beauty.

Oh, Ms. Andersen has a blog, too. If you can read Swedish, head on over there.