I've never understood why this is even an issue. I mean, yes, women ought to be careful when they're drinking because the world is full of incredibly shitty, predatory men who have been taught that their behavior is acceptable. But that's a practical concern, not an ethical one, and the way that even nominally…

Isn't Adam a failed right-wing blogger who's still coasting on goodwill from his role in an overrated TV show?

To be fair, a witch hunt is sort of warranted when the most shitloads of people will say is "It was a different time."

I always thought the Mic was the creepier part, since their patent history suggests that they want to use the Mic for stuff like focusing advertisements based on keywords.

They filed a patent for technology to forward what the camera and mic pick up to advertisers. it's hardly paranoid to think they'll act on that one day.

Well, to be fair, there are good reasons buried in the DSM's tortured history for why they only address outward symptoms.

Really? Because I don't. I can see how someone squeamish would be bothered by it, but that's hardly the same thing.

The collages are just a meditation on the same theme as the cake photos though: the aestheticization of and public indifference towards mass violence. Many of the photos he used were originally sold as post-cards. I'd argue that it's hardly off-limits simply because it was a big part of antebellum mass media.

Well, no. You're moralizing about how he's doing something "at the expense of our wounded military personnel", which is both irrelevant to whether or not it's good art and contracted by his statement on the piece. Do you think he's being duplicitous when he says that the piece is about the naivete of civilians?

Anything in particular? Because none of the stuff I saw on there struck me as sick or even especially "edgy".

It's not jest. It's making a sort of nasty, ironic point about how we process violence and warfare. Did you read the artist statement at all or just decide to be a jackass?

It's 217 in the book. When Kubrick made the film one of the hotels they based the Overlook on (I think the Timberline Lodge, which they based the exterior sets on) asked the production to change the room number because they were worried about the room getting a reputation. So it was changed to 237.

To paraphrase Philip Sandifer, The Doctor's into the Master, but the Master isn't really into anything so much as fucking with the Doctor's head.

The art style doesn't really seem big on traditional gender markers, which I think is kind of a mark in its favor.

Watching out for her kid would be talking to the teacher. Or even just reading the book and looking at the scene in context. There's no point at which anyone actually sat down with an educator and talked about the book or its appropriateness. The parent had a knee-jerk reaction and that rules the day. Not just for her…

Mm. I'm not really an engineering type, so I guess I must've misunderstood what I've read. Thanks for the clarification!

She's p. baller, dude.

As I understand it the fact that we'd be building them in vacant deserts that get a lot of sun consistently throughout the year means that power generation would become extremely centralized. Which is not only inefficient, it's downright dangerous.

I don't think they can use the newer costume because it's just something that McGann came up with for Big Finish. Sort of like the all blue version of Six's outfit that's been used in comics and (IIRC) Audio covers can't be used.

You seem to misunderstand the concept of pessimism as a psychological construct. A realist is a defensive pessimist, one who expects that bad things will happen and plans contingencies to deal with them. This is different from a dispositional pessimist, which is what you seem to think all pessimists are. The…