Roosh’s Return of Kings blog recently posted a list of “7 Brilliant Songs To Make Love To,” to help all the would-be Romeos (and possible rapists) who read his blog to more easily manipulate drunk women into bed.
I would like to provide a somewhat more whimsical service to readers here of all genders. So here are 9 Amazing Songs That It Is Probably Impossible To Have Sex To (Unless You Have Them Playing At Extremely Low Volume).
1) Joe Meek: Original demo version of Telstar. Joe Meek was a brilliant if eccentric British producer who was unfortunately not such a brilliant singer. Here he sings — in a rather jarringly off-key manner — the melody to what became the massive hit “Telstar.” Luckily his studio musicians were able to figure out what he was getting at. For the much improved final product, listen here.
2) Unknown Band: Cocaine It’s impossible not to stare and listen in horror at the train wreck that is this cover version of Cocaine, and staring in horror is not generally conducive to sweet, sweet lovemaking. Plus, I’m guessing at least one of these dudes is a Men’s Rights Activist.
3) Boxxy: You See (Extended Version) It’s the famously and deliberately irritating Internet meme girl Boxxy, only she’s been autotuned into something even more irritating. And this is the Extended Version.
3.1) Boxxy: Boxxy’s love song Oh wait, this one’s even worse.
4) brokeNCYDE: Freaxxx This emo-screamo mess might put you off sex, and music, forever.
5) Throbbing Gristle – Live in Sheffield – University (10 June 1980) If you really want to spoil the mood, 57 minutes of Throbbing Gristle live will certainly do the trick.
6) Rush: The Trees An Ayn-Randian parable on the wonders of the free market, with the main characters in the story being DIFFERENT SPECIES OF TREES. And it’s sung by Geddy Lee. Captain Awkward considers this the ultimate Sex Kryptonite song.
7) Sonseed: Jesus is My Friend Christian ska, by some people who really have no business playing ska at all. So, obviously, no sex will ever be happening to this song.
8) Jade Michael and the FTSU Crew: Go My Own Way A Men’s Rights classic! MRAs will be too busy “going their own way” to have sex to this, while the rest of us will be laughing too hard.
9) Rick Dees: Disco Duck On second thought, I think it might actually be possible to have sex to this song. Possibly even awesome sex.
It would almost be worth joining Second Life (do people still do that?) just to create Paul and JtO avatars to act that out.
re Portsmouth Sinfonia: that’s the orchestra trained by Harold Hill,
cloudiah – imagine if we had a Manboobz Second Life.
One with avatars, I mean. 😛
is Closer by Nine Inch Nails on that Roosh list? because if it is, it’s been ruined forever, like The Matrix and fedoras.
(ok maybe not forever, just while I’m on the internets)
About Rush’s “The Trees”. I heard that it wasn’t meant to be about Objectivism; Neil Peart claimed that he just thought trees would act like that if they were people. Fans and detractors alike find the lyrics too close to the usual Objectivist prattle to think it’s a coincidence though, especially since this is a band that went on about Onjectivism at length in a lot of their other songs.
This whole Trees thing has me thinking about Pterry’s Counting Pines …
He could try to sell that if it didn’t have the “and then a union came and ruined the cool trees’ natural superiority” ending.
I think he was truthful, but he had absorbed so much much of Rand’s influence at the time that he thought people really behaved like Rand claimed they did.
Fair enough, but it’s six of one, half a dozen of the other at that point.
And yet rumor has it that brokeNCYDE are one of the bands most likely to attempt to bang pretty much any female fan that they meet (I use the term “bang” deliberately here, as I can’t imagine it being much fun for anyone involved). So apparently there are some women who can sit through a whole set of that crap without it putting them off sex.
Never has there been a better illustration of the cliche that there’s no accounting for taste. Also, I can’t watch that video without wanting to pull the one dude’s pants up for him, since he’s managed to find the most unflattering spot possible to have them sit at on his hips. My inner fashion snob is as offended as my ears are.
Peart claims today that he abandoned Objectivism for…”bleeding-heart libertarianism”, a form of libertarianism that claims to be pro-social justice. I have no idea how that’s supposed to work because it seems like one would cancel out the other.
Whenever I see low-slung pants I want to tell the wearer to pull ’em up. On men particularly it looks like a baby with a full nappy.
I am kind of fascinated by the fact that dudebro managed to find the exact worst spot to place his waistband. Given how awful their overall aesthetic is I’m assuming he did it on purpose.
The Christian ska wins that “can’t have sex to this, nope, sorry” award, just because I’d be laughing too hard.
I’ve yet to see any low-slung pants that didn’t qualify as the worst spot to place the waistband … below the waist means any belly you have is pushed out (muffin top for guys), and when the crotch ends up seriously lower than the, ah, crotch, it just has FAIL all over it in my eyes.
And as for seeing the dude’s knickers over the jeans, no, no, no nonononono.
I don’t really want to have sex to music. There are plenty of songs/instrumentals that set the mood, whether we’re talking recorded stuff or having a giggle fit at Mr K tooling around on the lute, but during it’s a bit distracting.
Oh, I’ve seen low-rise jeans look great on some guys. It’s just that in this case he’s got the waistband sitting on the wrong place, and they don’t fit right, so it’s just awkward. We’re never going to agree on the issue of where the waistband sits in general, since I pretty much always prefer it to sit below the actual waist.
I should distinguish between low cut and low slung – I don’t mind lowish cut jeans, I just hate it when they’re ones worn like they’re falling off. Fitting snugly on the butt makes all the difference, mostly.
On that we can agree. Baggy butt is not a good look for any pants, or any butt either.
I tend not to see the waistline itself for preference anyway; I’m not wild about tops or shirts tucked in, especially when the waist is low. I like a shirt or jumper to cover the waistline.
Kitties can get away with baggy butts, of course, ‘cos fur.
That’s part of what looks odd about Mr Bad Hair’s ensemble above – the tshirt is awkwardly short in comparison to the pants. It just doesn’t work, overall. Fashion snob gives his outfit 2/10.
I actually like seeing that flash of skin at the waist on guys sometimes, but it’s a tricky look to pull off.
Or, hmm, not really too short, just ill-fitting, like the pants.
I wonder if critiquing a man’s dress sense is misandry.
“Peart claims today that he abandoned Objectivism for…”bleeding-heart libertarianism”, a form of libertarianism that claims to be pro-social justice. I have no idea how that’s supposed to work because it seems like one would cancel out the other.”
Never mind what I said then . . . I think my respect meter might be staying right where it is.
Bound to be.
Critiquing a man’s dress sense being misandry, that is.