If you can say this picture isn't FUCK HAWT Rachel, then I actually kind of feel sorry for you.

I found this chick. Her name is Rachel Marsden. And apparently she is not going to be in line anytime soon to do Rob. Fine by me. Bitches need not apply. But damn chica, can you set down the hater-ade and listen to me for a couple hundred words? I read your whole shiteous article, so now you can read mine!

Confused? Here is why I am hating on Rachel:

Have you noticed how many Hollywood casting choices nowadays seem to be made by gay men? How else can you explain the prominence of Zac Efron, Robert Pattinson, Shia LeBeouf, and every male in the Twilight movies? No real woman finds these guys attractive. I don’t want to witness anyone’s voice drop over the course of their silver screen “leading man” career. Real women fantasize about a man who can carry them to safety – not one who would rescue her from a poor choice of dress colour in the dressing room at the Gap.

I realise that many of these leading “men” are meant to appeal to young girls rather than mature women. That’s even more criminal. These girls really shouldn’t be developing a taste for boys their age. That’s just not normal. They’re at the age when they’re supposed to find boys repulsive. They should be spending their day at school trying to avoid “boy germs”, then on Friday night going with mom and dad to see a film featuring a real man who embodies a high standard of manhood with which they can taunt and challenge their male classmates.

It’s no wonder teenage girls are having sex with all sorts of losers in their class at an increasingly younger age.  The mop-heads to which they’re exposed on the big screen – these featherweights seen to be fending off realistic looking computer generated monsters when in real life they probably couldn’t carry their mother’s groceries with their spaghetti noodle arms – serve to inflate the fantasies of young girls vis-à-vis their similar looking male classmates.

When I was a teenager, I lusted after Tom Cruise in Top Gun. My mother’s generation had Rock Hudson, James Dean and Marlon Brando. As this list demonstrates, it isn’t even a question of the sexual orientation of the actors themselves – but rather whether they can convincingly pull off portraying a real man. For some it may involve more acting than we realise, but that’s why they’re paid millions.

I just read a survey showing that many of these young effetes score at the top of the “talent cost” vs “bums on seats” value ratio, so using them is perhaps just a question of economics in Hollywood. Alas, manly men are in short supply and cost more. You can’t just find real, convincing leading men in the playground, or getting mom-and-son matching frosted tips at the salon.

Don’t worry! I defend Rob right after the jump!! Continue reading