• Fandom is weird. My friends & I are all “nerds”, and I’m easily the most snobbish of us, but I’m also the one with the broadest taste. My view is that everyone lives in a bubble of some size, and we should aim to stretch the size of that bubble as much as possible. I’m lucky to have had parents who allowed me to develop my tastes on my own, and I still try to find elements I like in styles/genres I don’t. But man, I can be an ass sometimes about this. I know I should leave well enough alone, but I too often don’t.

  • clytie

    Yeah, in my household growing up there were very little in the way of overlapping tastes, so we all learned to respect and ignore what others liked.

    • Seth Carlson

      Hey, remember in the Dissolve Facebook group when Spotlight won Best Picture and you said that any Academy member who voted for it should kill themselves? HELLA respectful!

      • To be fair, maybe they didn’t practice growing up in her household until 2016.

        • clytie

          This is your first comment?

          • Did I trigger you, snowflake

          • clytie

            More like confused me. Who posts on an obscure website for the first time to join in insulting a random internet stranger? I’m ridiculously petty and childish and even I don’t do that.

          • One of the people you told to commit suicide for liking Spotlight in The Dissolve, you ignorant psychopath.

          • clytie

            You’re an Oscar voter? Did you vote for Moonlight or La La Land this year?

          • Why, are those other films you think people should take their own lives for enjoying?

          • clytie

            I insulted people that voted for Spotlight to win the best picture Oscar, so unless you’re one then I wasn’t talking about you.

          • Raoul F. Gonzo

            If someone does agree with you on Spotlight then they’re also wrong because your problem with the film isn’t that it isn’t good, it’s that it’s unfactual and that in itself is objectively incorrect.

            You can have your own opinion, not your own facts.

          • Klep

            Can it with the ad hominem.

      • clytie

        Did I trigger you, snowflake?

        How dare I take issue with a bunch of rich atheists rewarding a bigoted movie. Plenty of people on The Dissolve and The AV Club said worse things to me (including telling me to kill myself, and threatening my family members), but I’m not rich atheist, so I “deserve” it, right?

        You know what else is respectful? Making your very first post on trying to pick a fight with someone.

        • A lot of Catholics liked that movie, too, because it told the truth about a horrific abuse of power. If you’re going to defend the actions of people willing to allow children to be abused, you might want to rethink whether you’re really following the teachings of Jesus yourself.

          • clytie

            You know who allows children to be abused: rich showbiz folks

          • Klep

            So what? No one here is saying that problem doesn’t exist. This discussion is about your hypocrisy in claiming to live and let live when it comes to people liking films you don’t when you viciously attacked people who like a film you don’t.

          • Persia

            There were some hideous abuses in Ireland that the Irish people are very upset about. Is that supposed to be internalized bigotry, I wonder?

          • Yeah, would it have been better or worse if Philomena had beaten 12 Years a Slave, do you think?

        • John Bruni

          Do you begin every other post with “Did I trigger you, snowflake?”

          • Ruck Cohlchez 🌹

            I’m never really a fan of the phrasing, but I will stand up for clytie here: A first-time commenter showing up to deliberately pick a fight on an unrelated subject is a huge dick move.

          • Ruck Cohlchez 🌹

            (That’s a lie: I love using sarcastic variants on triggered snowflakes in situations like, say, this:)

            https://twitter.com/stefanmolyneux/status/848593107159576578?lang=en

          • I frankly disagree that it’s unrelated.

          • Ruck Cohlchez 🌹

            I don’t participate in the Facebook group, so I can’t comment on context. But I do participate at The Solute and it bothers me to see someone who doesn’t show up solely to attack someone who does for comments made weeks ago elsewhere.

          • I was horrified and sickened by the original comment, and I’m irritated at the hypocrisy. Because it’s demonstrably true that “I let people believe what they want” is at odds with “people who liked this movie should kill themselves,” and I don’t care if it’s first-time commenters saying so.

          • clytie

            TWO first time commenters. I guess I have a fan club that I didn’t know about. I feel so special.

            I also have John Bruni blocked so I have no idea what he said.

          • John Bruni
          • Persia

            I hardly ever comment here but I was a long time Dissolver. Do I not get a voice either?

        • Klep

          “How dare I take issue with a bunch of rich atheists rewarding a bigoted movie.”

          You took issue with individual commenters who liked the movie and thought it deserved those awards. Telling people they should kill themselves for liking a movie seems pretty at odds – hypocritical even – with the idea that you “respect and ignore what others liked.” And that’s even leaving aside the ludicrous notion that it’s a bigoted film, which I’m not going to dignify with an argument.

          “Plenty of people on The Dissolve and The AV Club said worse things to me
          (including telling me to kill myself…), but I’m not rich atheist, so I
          “deserve” it, right?”

          No one here said you deserve that, that’s a total strawman; it has nothing to do with your vicious attacks on other people for liking a movie and our condemnation of same. Just because it happened to you doesn’t give you the right to do the same to other people. It doesn’t make you feel good, so why would you lash out and visit that same pain on others? Vengeance is petty, and vengeance against people who didn’t even attack you to begin with is shameful.

          • clytie

            “You took issue with individual commenters who liked the movie and thought it deserved those awards. Telling people they should kill themselves for liking a movie seems pretty at odds – hypocritical even -with the idea that you ‘respect and ignore what others liked.’

            I specified “people that voted for it.” I could be wrong, but I’m guessing that nobody that read my Facebook was an Oscar voter.

            My “respect and ignore what others liked” was specifically regarding my family (ie-“in my household”). Growing up, my family had on TV and since there was little overlap in tastes it was like playing musical chairs.

            “No one here said you deserve that, that’s a total strawman; it has nothing to do with your vicious attacks on other people for liking a movie and our condemnation of same. Just because it happened to you doesn’t give you the right to do the same to other people. It doesn’t make you feel good, so why would you lash out and visit that same pain on others? Vengeance is petty, and vengeance against people who didn’t even attack you to begin with is shameful.”

            If any of the millionaires I insulted read my comment, they can dry their tears on their piles of money.

            So, basically I should be nice, but everyone else is allowed to be mean? Gotcha! Did you also yell at the AV Clubber that said that Nicholas Sparks should die? Or the one that said Jill Stein supporters should be harassed? Or the one that said gun owners should be?

            Vengeance is awesome. Veronica Mars agrees with me!

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/02/22/4d/02224d66b6a4cc583b5ff2d90d42c2b9.jpg

          • Klep

            “I specified “people that voted for it.” I could be wrong, but I’m guessing that nobody that read my Facebook was an Oscar voter.”

            It honestly doesn’t matter. If you think that people should “respect and ignore what others liked” then attacking anyone personally for liking a film is blatant hypocrisy, and saying they should kill themselves is way out of line.

            No one is supposed to be mean, but people who profess to live and let live with regards to disagreements on film in particular are not allowed to be mean when others disagree with them on a film. No one here is saying people should be mean to you. We are simply pointing out that you do not follow your own principle when it comes to something you don’t like, and that you have been vicious in your attacks.

          • clytie

            “It honestly doesn’t matter.”

            Then why are you harping on things I said OVER A YEAR AGO?

            “If you think that people should ‘respect and ignore what others liked’ then attacking anyone personally for liking a film is blatant hypocrisy, and saying they should kill themselves is way out of line.”

            I never said that. I said that, “in my household growing up there were very little in the way of overlapping tastes, so we all learned to respect and ignore what others liked.” Unless you grew up in my household (did you?) then I wasn’t referring to you at all.

            “No one is supposed to be mean, but people who profess to live and let live with regards to disagreements on film in particular are not allowed to be mean when others disagree with them on a film. No one here is saying people should be mean to you. We are simply pointing out that you do not follow your own principle when it comes to something you don’t like, and that you have been vicious in your attacks.”

            People are plenty “vicious” to me. I’m vicious to millionaires that don’t even see the things I said.

          • Klep

            So how is your having learned to “respect and ignore what others liked” at all consistent with you passing judgement on others that their appreciation for a film makes their life so self-evidently harmful to the world that they should take it upon themselves to remove themselves from it? Or are the only people you respect enough to not viciously attack for liking films you don’t those in your own family? If you have a principle you don’t get to abandon it just because you don’t know the target of your attack or because it’s convenient for you, and that violation of that principle doesn’t get erased because it’s been a long time. You either have the principle or you don’t, and you acknowledge that you violated it or not

            And again, it doesn’t matter that people are mean to you for purposes of this discussion. No one here – certainly not myself – is saying that anyone should be mean to you. It doesn’t give you the right to be mean to others. You always pull this card when you get criticized and it’s bullshit.

            It doesn’t matter whether they see what you say or not. It’s beyond the pale to suggest anyone should kill themselves for liking a film and contrary to your own stated principle.

          • clytie

            “So how is your having learned to ‘respect and ignore what others liked’ at all consistent with you passing judgement on others that their appreciation for a film makes their life so self-evidently harmful to the world that they should take it upon themselves to remove themselves from it? Or are the only people you respect enough to not viciously attack for liking films you don’t those in your own family? ”

            I, of course, said none of that.

            I said, “IN MY HOUSEHOLD GROWING UP, there were very little in the way of overlapping tastes, so we all learned to respect and ignore what others liked.” Unless you, GREW UP IN MY HOUSEHOLD, then I wasn’t referring to you at all.

            Unless you are secretly my mother or youngest brother then I wasn’t talking about you. When I posted the comment I was thinking about how I would watch a TV show and leave the room, my mom would come in and watch a different TV show then leave, then my brother would come in and watch another TV show. If you’re interested; I watched The E! True Hollywood Story, my mom watched The Oprah Winfrey Show, and my brother watched Stargate: SG1.

            “If you have a principle you don’t get to abandon it just because you don’t know the target of your attack or because it’s convenient for you, and that violation of that principle doesn’t get erased because it’s been a long time. You either have the principle or you don’t, and you acknowledge that you violated it or not.”

            I know “the target of” my “attack.” You clearly don’t. Again, it was OSCAR VOTERS.

            So stop claiming I said all this other stuff about principals when I didn’t.

            “And again, it doesn’t matter that people are mean to you for
            purposes of this discussion. No one here – certainly not myself – is saying that anyone should be mean to you. It doesn’t give you the right to be mean to others. You always pull this card when you get criticized and it’s bullshit.”

            Yeah, people threatening to to “rape and murder” my family members is total “bullshit.”

            I just don’t understand why it’s okay for people to say such things to me, but anything negative I say, I must be punished for.

            “It doesn’t matter whether they see what you say or not. It’s beyond the pale to suggest anyone should kill themselves for liking a film and contrary to your own stated principle.”

            I disagree.

            People said absolutely vile things about Mel Gibson on The AV Club at Oscar night, including that he should die. Though it was more in the “randomly drop dead” than “commit suicide” sense. Did you scream at them? Like me, they were attacking a wealthy famous that was unlikely to see them.

          • Why are we harping on it? Because it was vile. You are aware, are you not, that I have dealt with suicidal ideation since childhood? That’s my struggle. I don’t talk about it much, but there it is. And I have absolutely no doubt that the children who were abused by Catholic priests whom the Church then sheltered have in many cases dealt with suicidal ideation, too, given the known responses to sexual molestation. A movie came out that used facts to tell their stories. You decided you didn’t like those facts. You said one of the worst things ever written in the Facebook group, and that includes by some people who were banned for what they said. And you’re dressing it all up in claims of anti-Catholic bigotry because that lets you pretend that facts aren’t facts. You then come here with the unbridled hypocrisy to claim that you’re all about live and let live.

            Oh, right–that only applies to your family. Because other people that you don’t know aren’t as important as your own feelings. As we already knew given how you were willing to claim that molested children were lying about their experiences to smear a faith that many of them still, in fact, profess.

          • clytie

            I never told you to kill yourself. Nor would I ever. I also never claimed I was “all about live and let live,” and didn’t think my comment would be take that way.

          • No one here is telling you that you should die, so that argument is completely irrelevant here. What we are saying is that you need to actually own your words. Your reaction was ludicrous and extreme. And I’m unclear on why you’re surprised that people take it to mean that everyone who agreed with the decision is also beneath your contempt.

            It doesn’t matter to me that you only think a very narrow group of people should kill themselves, because telling anyone that they should kill themselves over voting for a movie to win an award is foul. Like, I’m running out of adjectives to describe this behaviour. It is also the antithesis of the actions I’m suggesting in this article. At best, you should instead present a reasoned, rational argument as to why their support of said movie is wrong.

            Of course, your reasoned, rational argument is built on lies, as you refuse to acknowledge the enormous weight of evidence that the events presented in Spotlight are accurate. You are incredibly dismissive of the testimony of the victims, which I also happen to think is reprehensible. Anyone who tells you that you deserve to die for that is wrong. But they aren’t wrong that you need to actually look at the facts. The Catholic leadership can, and acknowledges the factual accuracy of the meat of that movie. But somehow, that isn’t good enough for you, because that doesn’t let you claim anti-Catholic bigotry.

          • clytie

            I do own my words. The problem is that people keep twisting what I said by claiming that I told them personally to die, which I didn’t.

            I say horrible things ALL THE TIME. My point has been: so do other people (I deleted my “Hatefest” article because I was called so many names) and they’re not constantly “called out on” it.

            People don’t care about “reasoned, rational arguments” on the internet.

          • No, when presented with the facts that your words were cruel, offensive, and wrong, your response is “but people are mean to me!” So what? That doesn’t justify your words, and you need to be aware that people were angry at you for them. Maybe “that was ill-considered” would be a place to start instead of doubling down with “oh, but it’s okay to wish death on people as long as they’re Academy voters!” Which is frankly the stupidest justification for that statement I can imagine.

          • clytie

            I’m just confused as to why I must adhere to a different standard than others. Why am I the only person that’s not allowed to say things that are, “cruel, offensive, and wrong?”

            You’re twisting what I said. People keep saying, “YOU TOLD ME TO DIE! ” Unless you voted for the movie, I didn’t.

          • What are you, a child? I’m not twisting what you said. I’m telling you that “they did it first!” isn’t going to fly with me. What you said was wrong. No matter about whom you said it. You should apologize. Just because I’m not an Academy voter, it doesn’t magically make what you said okay.

          • clytie

            I didn’t say that it was “okay.” I said that I didn’t tell anyone here to die, because I DIDN’T!

            Who am I supposed to even apologize to? No one my comment was addressed to saw it. I apologized above for upsetting you, for which I am sorry for.

          • Do you understand why I’m upset? Even a little? And can you answer that without referring to what other people on the internet said to you?

          • clytie

            Yes, I understand it. Again, I’m sorry that I upset you. Again, I don’t apologize unless I mean it. Since I didn’t direct my comments at anyone there directly.

            I’m going to delete them, but typing the things people said to me did make me understand it better. I referenced people over at Ye Ole AV Club saying vicious things to/about Jill Stein supporters last year. I only had one person do it to me (and their insults were so stupid and their arguments were lies

          • I don’t care, for the purposes of what you said, about what other people said to you. I think anyone who voted for Jill Stein is laughably ignorant about, well, a lot of things, but whatever. Your vote, your choice. If someone then said to me that Jill Stein supporters should die (unless it was of preventable diseases that they refused to vaccinate themselves and their children for), I would be opposed to that. Because I never said you should die, the fact that other people did is not a defense for you saying other people should die.

            Let me make this clear. You have chosen to deny some facts. A lot of them. That’s . . . I guess your choice, though it doesn’t say good things about you. You personally dislike Spotlight. That’s your choice, too, or your taste, or whatever. I disagree, but that’s fine. As I spent many words expressing, you’re entitled to disagree with others’ tastes.

            But by using suicide as an insult, you are being incredibly dismissive of the very real issues people face when they deal with suicidal ideation. Okay, you’re sorry you offended me. So that part, whatever.

            The bigger problem is that you are trying to paint yourself as a martyr. Even after I specifically asked you not to reference what other people said about you, you did. So that’s a thing you are just going to keep doing. You are also going to keep claiming that the positive reaction to a film is all some sort of anti-Catholic bigotry, and when I pointed out to you that the Pope was one of the people who thought that was a good and accurate film, your reaction was to question the Pope’s Catholic credentials. So you come across as a person whose personal stance is more important than, you know, evidence.

            Then, you posted something about the happy experience you had letting people have the taste they had without judging. When called on the fact that maybe this is a little hypocritical, you insisted that you only had that policy when it came to your family, which is actually a different kind of insulting. Only your family are entitled to that consideration, I guess? And people who aren’t in your family can die in a fire.

            No. You never wished anyone here personally dead, as we keep agreeing. As it happens, most of us have repeatedly agreed as well that anyone who wished you dead was also wrong, so maybe stop throwing yourself that little pity party about how you’re the only one whose statements get judged. You have, in pursuit of your anger, insulted mentally ill people, Academy voters, sexually molested children, and the Pope. And that is why people are mad at you.

          • clytie

            “I don’t care, for the purposes of what you said, about what other people
            said to you.”

            Of course not. So why I care about how my comments hurt others when I’m not given the same consideration?

            “I think anyone who voted for Jill Stein is laughably
            ignorant about, well, a lot of things, but whatever. Your vote, your
            choice. If someone then said to me that Jill Stein supporters should
            die (unless it was of preventable diseases that they refused to
            vaccinate themselves and their children for), I would be opposed to
            that. Because I never said you should die, the fact that other people
            did is not a defense for you saying other people should die.”

            I never said “was a defense” for anything. I was just explaining how I did see your side thanks to being similarly hurt.

            You know insulting people (ie- saying that they’re “laughably ignorant”) while “calling them out” on saying unkind things isn’t the best argument.

            Oh, and, Dr. Stein isn’t an anti-vaxxer. That’s a disgusting smear.
            https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/759142652243644416

            “The bigger problem is that you are trying to paint yourself as a martyr.
            Even after I specifically asked you not to reference what other people
            said about you, you did. So that’s a thing you are just going to keep
            doing. You are also going to keep claiming that the positive reaction
            to a film is all some sort of anti-Catholic bigotry, and when I pointed
            out to you that the Pope was one of the people who thought that
            was a good and accurate film, your reaction was to question the Pope’s
            Catholic credentials. So you come across as a person whose personal
            stance is more important than, you know, evidence.”

            I never meant to play a martyr, and find the accusation pretty hilarious in light of the multiples of people that are all, “YOU TOLD ME TO KILL MYSELF”

            I never claimed any level of expertise or knowledge. As I’ve been repeatedly told, I’m dumb.

            “Then, you posted something about the happy experience you had letting
            people have the taste they had without judging. When called on the fact
            that maybe this is a little hypocritical, you insisted that you only
            had that policy when it came to your family, which is actually a
            different kind of insulting. Only your family are entitled to that
            consideration, I guess? And people who aren’t in your family can die in
            a fire.”

            I was not simply, “called on the fact
            that maybe this is a little hypocritical.” Multiple people that never once posted before came here for the first time (why???), and called me names and were clearly just trying to start a fight with me using and twisting something that I said more than a year ago someplace else.

            It never claimed it was “policy” which soundly weirdly formal. I was just relating an experience from years ago.

            “Only your family are entitled to that
            consideration, I guess? And people who aren’t in your family can die in
            a fire.”

            This is what I’m talking about when I say people twist what I say.

            “No. You never wished anyone here personally dead, as we keep agreeing.
            As it happens, most of us have repeatedly agreed as well that anyone
            who wished you dead was also wrong, so maybe stop throwing
            yourself that little pity party about how you’re the only one whose
            statements get judged.”

            Again, you’re giving angry at me over something I said more than a year ago directed at other people, but when I dredge up things from the past, you dismiss them it as a “pity party.”

            “You have, in pursuit of your anger, insulted
            mentally ill people, Academy voters, sexually molested children, and the Pope. And that is why people are mad at you.”

            Yeah, and? I don’t

          • I’m trying to get you to start showing a little self-reflection.

            And Jill Stein used a lot of “just asking questions” language that is a known dog-whistle for anti-vaccination lies. She says she supports them, but she’s also perfectly willing to court the anti-vaxxer vote by using certain language. It’s not a smear to notice that.

            “Die in a fire” is an expression to indicate that you don’t care. Only the specific opinions of your family, you’ve said, are immune from judgement. That’s super not okay. And exactly what is the statute of limitations on my being annoyed at your language? I can be upset that you said something reprehensible last week, but not last year?

            It literally does not matter who you told to kill themselves, whether it was me or general Academy voters. It’s not okay to say that. And if anyone told you where I was part of the conversation to kill yourself, I’d say that, too. And you’re willfully ignorant, apparently, since you think you get to just deny facts and brush that off with “so what?” So I think I’m done with you.

          • clytie

            “I’m trying to get you to start showing a little self-reflection.”

            Why?

            “And Jill Stein used a lot of ‘just asking questions’ language that is a known dog-whistle for anti-vaccination lies. She says she supports them, but she’s also perfectly willing to court the anti-vaxxer vote by using certain language. It’s not a smear to notice that.”

            She has explicitly stated multiple times that she’s not an anti-vaxxer, which would be a weird way to court them. All of what you refer to as her “questioning” remarks were about a distrust of big pharm, not medicine itself. A position I agree with, particularly after stuff like Martin Shkreli’s antics, and on a personal level, having to go without medication that I was prescribed because a month’s supply is MORE THAN MY RENT.

            People have framed her statements as being anti-vaccinations, because anti-vaxxers frequently use the influence of big pharm as one of the reasons to be anti-vaccinations. Just because anti-vaxxers are wrong about everything else, doesn’t mean they’re wrong about that.

            I know I’ll never change your mind about Dr. Stein, so I’m moving on from the topic.

            “‘Die in a fire’ is an expression to indicate that you don’t care.”

            No, it means you hate someone enough that you wish them harm/death.

            Urban Dictionary agrees with me:
            “Statement of extreme disgust or hatred by which one wishes harm on another. The phrase became popular in early 2006 following a news story that drew national attention to a policy by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission of arresting drunks inside bars.
            The TABC began receiving a large volume of hate mail from around the country, and in a follow-up story TABC spokesperson Carolyn Beck was quoted as saying, “I don’t really understand the hateful outrage. I don’t understand, ‘Die in a fire.'”
            http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Die%20in%20a%20fire

            “Only the specific opinions of your family, you’ve said, are immune from judgement. That’s super not okay.”

            I, of course, NEVER SAID THAT. As I have said, MULTIPLE TIMES, which you have ignored, I was relating a very specific anecdote, that I expected to be met with similar ones.

            Here it is: “Yeah, in my household growing up there were very little in the way of overlapping tastes, so we all learned to respect and ignore what the others liked.”.

            Somehow in your mind that becomes, “Everyone outside my immediate family that doesn’t like what I like should die a painful death.” I mean, really?

            Also, I say mean things to my family members all the time, including telling plenty of them I wish that they were dead. Which I totally do btw.

            “And exactly what is the statute of limitations on my being annoyed at your language? I can be upset that you said something reprehensible last week, but not last year?”

            It’s less a stature of limitations than confused by the delayed reaction. Plus, your repeated dismissal of people saying similar things to me in the past makes me less sympathetic to it

            “It literally does not matter who you told to kill themselves, whether it was me or general Academy voters. It’s not okay to say that. And if anyone told you where I was part of the conversation to kill
            yourself, I’d say that, too.”

            I never claimed it was okay. I have also repeatedly apologized for upsetting you. I am sorry for that. You’re a generally nice person (I’m not), and I’m sure you would denounce someone telling me to kill myself.

            Just that I don’t understand why I get singled out for saying something horrible when others don’t.

            “And you’re willfully ignorant, apparently, since you think you get to just deny facts and brush that off with “so what?” So I think I’m done with you.”

            Yeah, so, what? I’m allowed to be “willfully ignorant.”

            I also simply don’t want to have such a conversation with someone that doesn’t listen to me, as you’ve repeatedly indicated, and who also dismisses or twists everything I say.

            I tried to understand you, and I gave what you said genuine thought and consideration, only to be told that everything I said was “irrelevant,” so why bother? No matter what I say, you’ll just keep insisting, “YOU THINK PEOPLE THAT AREN’T YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS SHOULD DIE IN A FIRE!”

          • This isn’t “the internet” here, though. We are, exactly, people who care about “reasoned, rational arguments.” There’s a way we treat each other here that’s really unique and almost everyone has remarked on that. Not everyone else does it and especially not here.

          • clytie

            I didn’t post it here though. I posted it on my personal Facebook page.

          • And I shot back at the person who said that because you are welcome here, and if someone does that again in my presence I’ll do the same. (What you said in that conversation, about how we judge celebrities differently, has stuck with me and I’ve continued to think about it.) Point taken about you saying this on your Facebook page; I’ll remember that this conversation is about something happening off-Solute.

          • clytie

            Not only off-Solute, but brought up initially by people that never posted here before.

        • Persia

          You know, at least the dumb fucks who wanted the Joe Paterno statue back up at Penn State were willing to admit they cared more about football victories than the rape of children. They didn’t pull out tired horseshit about ‘bigotry.’

  • Being cool with people not liking the same stuff you do was one of the most important ideas that brought me from adolescence to adulthood.

  • DJ JD

    Late to the game, but Sturgeon’s Law is wonderful and everyone should apply it to everything they hate. “Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That’s because 90% of everything is crud.”