I guess I’m a little confused. Someone who gives up one big thing in the name of some environmental principle, but doesn’t take it so far as to live in a cave in a toga made from leaves sewn together with hemptwine, is a big old hypocritical doody head who should shut their big fat mouth? Is that the jist of it?

This is like an adjunct to the idea that the poor deserve to be shit upon. Unless you can afford to pay a premium, you should be stewing in the farts of other diners. My personal feeling is that we all deserve to dine in dignity, regardless of the size of our wallets, in a pleasant, fart-free atmosphere.

No fart-free…

Sodden sponge in sink is like the most disgusting thing.

I’m, like, new to your country or something. Let me see if I got this right. Only ‘nice’ restaurants should be fart-free. Everywhere else, you should request the no-farting section?

don’t you know anything. how else are they gonna tip their waitress.

Family: a synonym for ‘collective insanity’.
I have a friend who burps freely in front of me and others. I noticed that his dad does this too. Family is who teaches you what is ‘normal’—but needless to say, they’re not always right.

Jeezus. What a story.

I’d very much like to know this too.

is this based on pure conjecture, or experience within the industry?

I’m guessing companies that make foods that are certified kosher/halal/allergen free. Not sure what else. I can see a potential consumer market driving growth, much as what’s happened in the world of organic food.

That’s unmitigated bullshit. Most vegetarians I know are just going about the business of living their own lives, when aggressive meat eating asshats start with the heckling.

“Licorice everything.” Ok, now I’m curious—what else do they typically flavor with licorice?

I love black licorice. The kind with flavor, rather than the abomination that is black twizzler. But since these are so small, and take longer to reach us here because imported, I’d assume they’re stale, and will fuck my teeth up. Am I wrong?

While certain diagnoses, when not successfully treated, may involve paranoia or psychosis, we can’t assume that when discussing someone with mental illness. It’s damaging, depersonalizing, and not supported by population studies, statistical analysis, or individual case studies. It’d kind of be like going into the…

What part of “I’m sure a lot of people who have a hate-on for Rosie O’Donnell will completely ignore the fact that this is coming from a teenager with a serious mental illness” does not translate to “her opinion can’t be trusted because she has a mental illness”?

While I know that certain diagnoses, when not successfully treated, may involve paranoia or psychosis, we can’t assume that when discussing someone with mental illness. It’s damaging, and depersonalizing.

People with mental illnesses hold jobs, bear children, vote, do all sorts of things that involve trust,…

There’s really nothing else I can say. I’ve already apologized. You disagree with what I consider logical; you’re making it a personal attack. Shruggy emoticon goes here.

I’m sorry, but your opinion is invalid because bipolar.

Sorry, just a little joke. I’m sorry if I’m coming across as snarky. It’s not intended. I do not intend to demean you; I just disagree with the point you’re making, and I’m refuting it as logically as I’m able. No disrespect intended.

I don’t think it’s the same point. Let me back track to see where the misunderstanding lies. Your earlier comment seemed to support those who’d say her opinion is tinted by her having a mental illness. I said that it’s more likely due to her being a teen. You then said we’re arguing the same thing. These two things…

No, what I’m saying is, this is exactly the same as if she was of a certain race, and people who are prejudiced against this group decide to attribute her actions to her skin color, even when there are other more viable explanations.
We are bombarded with negative messages—misinformation and hate speech—about people…