Err...what, Cosmo???

Being the social dynamo that I am, I am lying in my bed at 10:00pm on a Saturday night, flipping aimlessly through the June issue of Cosmo. Don't worry, I had a chance at a social life tonight-- my ex, Summer Romance, texted me up out of the blue at 11:57pm last night (yes, I was asleep then--I'm adjusting to the slower pace of home life after college, people, cut me some slack) to invite me to his bonfire tonight. That's right. Basically the ONLY ex of mine that I don't have a healthy and perhaps-weirdly-close relationship with just texted me out of the blue to invite me to his bonfire tonight, for his roommate (housemate? That sounds Australian) Jack's birthday. Let's discuss.

1. Pretttttty sure Summer Romance has a new gf. And has had one. For awhile. She's cute and looks nice and I am not a homewrecker. Especially since, unbeknownst to me, my whole relationship with Summer Romance wrecked the home of a co-worker of mine...very messy stuff.

2. When I texted him back to ask him if I knew anyone going to this bonfire? He responded, "A lil this, a lil that."

Um? Is that supposed to mean something to me? Can anyone translate? Did that answer my question? Perhaps most importantly, where did the t's and the e's in "little" go?

3. No, Summer Romance. I will not go to your bonfire. My boyfriend is very lovely and wonderful and understanding of my strange need to keep close friendships with my exes, but you treated me like ish, and he would not be okay with me, nor would I feel comfortable, going to your bonfire. But happy birthday Jack-- I always liked you, even though you probably had no idea what the hell was going on with our completely toxic relationship.

SO that's what we call a digression. The point....the point. Ah, yes. Cosmo.

So, there's a lot of things in Cosmo that are scoff-out-loud-slap-your-knee-ridiculous. Cosmo seems to love, for example, suggesting that girls do really strange things to their men's peeps. Things that make all the men I have shown the publication to run away or vomit in sheer, sheer horror.

But this issue has some sort of fun, and also some out-there, and most importantly non-peep related (I like to keep it PG-13 here on the ol' blog in case the fam ever decides to take it up some time) tidbits of info that I just had to share with you guys. Truly great stuff.

First of all, you may remember from this post that I like my men t-a-l-l tall. The Jolly Green Giant and I would be very, very happy together. All of my serious boyfriends have been taller than 6'0 (quite a contrast to my petite 5'4 frame), and in fact, when I think about it, I believe there very well may be a positive correlation between the tallness of boyfriend and how crazy about him I am/was. So anywhoodle, Cosmo has gotten some more super interesting stats on tall men v. short men. And their two examples? The strapping 6'2 Jason Segel (my future husband) and Kevin Connolly, who stands at a squirrely 5'8 (love Entourage, but sorry E.--we could never be). Apparently, tall men are more likely to be:

1. Popular-- "They are physically dominant, readily accepted into a group...and likely to command a room." (Please note: dramatic use of the ellipsis there is all Cosmo.)

2. Happy-- "According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, tall men report higher levels of life satisfaction." I thought it was a little odd that this info came from the National Bureau of Economic Research, but tidbit number three makes it all clear...

3. Flush-- "A study found that every inch amps up his salary by about $789 per year."

Two things: Flush? What does that mean? Do you guys use the word "flush" to describe men who earn more money based on being tall and smokin'? Secondly, that clearly explains why they're happier....and thus the NBER all makes sense.

As for our more vertically disinclined friends, well, apparently they're more likely to be

1. Sensitive-- "They develop this part of their personality to appeal to more women."

2. Sexual dynamos-- "Shorties are especially enthusiastic and attentive because they've had to work harder to attract and keep women."

3. Long living-- "They keep ticking almost five years past their taller counterparts."

These all, to me, just sound like ways of proving that "shorties" (their word, not mine--you saw it!) are better than tall men...by completely insulting the crap out of them. Touche Cosmo. Touche.

This month's mag also has a nice little chart of the US which lists the most and least....well endowed states. And yes, the dramatic ellipsis there was allll mine. In case you were wondering, New Orleans has the most well-endowed men, while ladies may want to think twice before moving to Dallas/Fort Worth. (Sorry Melissa, Natalie, CJR, Shine, and Liz!) (Jeez, is it weird that Dallas/Fort Worth bloggers comprise half my blogroll? Did I miss any?)

Okay, moving on. Katy Perry and Zooey Deschanel. So I googled it, and yep, definitely not the first person to notice this. A little sad about that. But basically, ohmygoshyouguysthey'rethesamepersonanditreallycreepsmeout. Well, almost the same person. If Katy Perry got a little angstier and decided to make indie films where she plays the same character all of the time (a good one! Just...the same...one...) rather than make catchy pop songs, then, THEN, they'd be the same.

Proof.

(Which one is which?!)

Alright, now that I've blown your minds. The next thing. "Brunet." This has been happening for awhile, and in fact I think I may have even included it in my angry letter to whoever designed the January cover of Cosmo that looked like Amanda Bynes and lemonade blew up and exploded everywhere.

And if I didn't...well. I meant to, but I was clearly too fired up about the cover. But I mean you guys. Come ON. It was hideous. But again I digress. Brunet just looks like an angry word. And though the phonetically pretty and aesthetically attractive "brunette" spelling reads in my mind the way the word is supposed to be pronounced (bruNETTE), this loppy and awkward spelling reads angrily and a bit German in my head (BRUNET!)

And finally. I've saved the best for last. Drum roll please.....

Hot pants.

Hot pants.

Are they shorts? Do they have to be really tight shorts to be considered hot pants? How short do they have to be? Is the requirement just "sufficiently slutty enough?" (I apologize to those of you who enjoy the hot pants. I promise I don't judge you. Only if you actually CALL them hot pants. Then, we can't be friends."

While I'm at it, I should probably issue an apology to Cosmo, in the off chance that I do ever seek employment at their fine publication. I love you guys. I promise. Just lay off the hot pants references and make up your minds about the spelling of "brunette." Oh, and I don't really care about how big men's peeps are in different cities, but points for running a graph on something other than cities with the highest level of unemployment. You're nothing if not refreshing...

(Completely...well...almost....unrelated: BREAKING NEWS. Just saw on the interwebs that The Devil Incarnate--er--Spencer, and Heidi, are separating! Oh happy day! This deserves its own post, since I have been fired up about how much I can't stand that d-bizzle for awhile [PLUS he's SHORT! ha!], and I know that everyone is super excited to read it soon.)