Yes, particularly since I've been guilty of being reductive in the past. Above all I try not to prescribe someone's motives and beliefs to them based on the profile I think they fit from one comment (or a handful of them), which is one of the most obnoxious and useless things people do to each other on the internet.

There's an interesting bit toward the end of The Dig, after a major character dies. Throughout the game, your team discovered and repeatedly made use of life crystals, advanced alien technology that could revive the dead, but were also extremely addictive and created an obsession that eventually overrode one's…

I'm not denying that exists, although you could debate what "real change" means in the context of pushing back against specific discriminatory stuff online. Not every social critique has to be measured in how it contributes toward reaching utopia — sometimes people just feel the need to say "hey, that's not cool" to…

Hey, thanks for proving my point.

I'm not saying there aren't people who do that, or (more often) are simply overzealous in trying to push back against small-scale problematic stuff. But SJW is too loaded a term, meaning too many different things depending on who uses it. It's bad shorthand, because it's been co-opted by people who use it to smear the…

In practice, it's more a shorthand way to dismiss anyone who has a social critique of any kind. A very useful way for that other particular group of people we all know about to reduce all social criticism to unserious hysteria and/or censorship.

The worst thing you can do in the eyes of a data-aggregating site is not give them enough data, I guess.

I think there'd be an actual following for that character, and not a small one, either.

I think this is a case of "dude, wouldn't it be funny if we made a movie where", and the answer is "no, I think the pitch itself is the correct amount of time to devote to this idea".

Don't expect her to stand up to the Netflix of Wine, either.

It really couldn't have happened to a better party.

The important thing isn't whether we tacitly excuse domestic violence for celebrities as a society, the important thing is whether it annoys people when they hear about it

No John Oliver!? Christ, It's like they don't even respect the source material

I think it's an issue that's best (and most often) addressed in aggregate, even when citing specific examples. Any one thing on its own is usually not a problem, but it's because it has an effect on how different ethnicities are portrayed negatively or made invisible, how whiteness is seen as default or "normal", how…

I know a lot of people find the "fish out of water" approach overdone, but I agree, it's a strong perspective to use and probably truer to his point of view.

He hasn't been around long enough OR developed a distinct voice and perspective as a satirist/critic. I've seen him deliver some sharp viewpoints in his desk pieces, but I don't feel like they're "his", yet.

"As a frequent browser of reddit, my expert assessment is as follows"

I feel like it's more clown shoes and noses than horns but whatever imagery you like better

I really really don't get these people, but then I don't own a Tyler Durden body pillow, either.

The Obama presidency has been marked by Republicans opposing everything he says, and supporting everything he opposes on pure reflex. So I'm looking forward to the GOP candidates rushing to be the first to drink their own piss on television.