I'm pretty sure the other shoe is about to drop in the finale.

To be fair, I'm not sure we've seen the limits of either Lapis or Aquamarine's power. As long as Lapis is near water, her powers are godlike.
She took down Jasper with a single blow. She siphoned the entire Atlantic ocean into space.
It also seems like a good chunk of Aquamarine's power requires access to her wand. I'm…

I'm not saying there's no way Syd would sleep with David. I'm saying that Syd's sudden and apparently unconditional allegiance to David is out of character.
The fact that you keep twisting what it is we're discussing does, honestly, make you seem like a plebe.
You're inferring what Syd's baggage entails as if there…

Pay attention to what the show is actually telling you about the characters.
Nobody is denying that Syd loves David. The problem is that you don't seem to understand:
1) the mechanics of that relationship
2) the mechanics of the show
On re-watching Chapter 5, and especially in the context of Chapter 6, I can assure you…

"I do agree that it was strange that there was no follow up to her learning about all the bad things he'd done in the previous episode."

Like I said already, it's not consistent characterization or tone.
In both cases, the reactions broke the character arcs. Melanie is an authority to David; if David has something she wants, she doesn't become compromised— she leverages her authority. She has vulnerability, but also strategy.
Syd's love for David stems…

You realize that in both cases the explanations weaken the characters, right?
Yeah, Jean is a pro; but the director for this episode screwed it up.
If Denny is going to be that aggressive and assertive, we either need to see the characters react with suspicion.
Instead, Denny mentions Oliver and Melanie reacts like he…

I'm a little iffy on the explanations here for Syd being swayed so heavily by Denny (that's my name for David under Lenny).
You can rationalize it psychologically, but it doesn't feel all that consistent with the characters or the tone. The reviewer over on Vulture insisted on "problematicizing" the issue with gender…

Well pretty obviously there was a failure to communicate on all sides, and that's what escalated the conflict.
In general, if one party is preparing to take drastic punitive measures, the moral onus lies upon that party to first make sure those measures are warranted. Again, just a matter of basic human decency.
Also…

Do you have something substantive to reply, or are you just asserting that Matt and Trey will vindicate your viewpoint in the coming weeks?
I don't look to South Park to vindicate my point of view; but you should know that these guys revel in the fact that people project their ideology onto the show. Which means, I…

I'm going to just pull some quotes here:
JW:
"How does something like South Park fly right over your head? It doesn't argue that Butters is right. The show let Butters argue for himself and he was correct."
PainbowDash:
"In what possible way was Butters portrayed as correct? "
JW:
"The boys listened to the girls. They did…

It's not entitlement.
As a matter of basic human decency, regardless of sex or orientation, your partner shouldn't break up with you purely to retaliate against your entire sex.
That's not the same thing as "man feels woman is obligated to date him". More like "man feels like woman shouldn't break up with him for…

"If I have to keep my clothes on then she has to date me".
Talk about a false equivalence.
Yes, our social expectations are that dating is completely voluntary;
however, the motive and manner in which the girls broke up with the boys is significant. It's not as if each of them, independently, felt disinterested in their…

Well Jon Stewart is no longer the host of The Daily Show, but they did actually defend him in this segment:
http://www.cc.com/video-cli…

If you watch the whole series, the show is absurdly judgmental about the concept of robot sex.

He uses his right arm to put cash down on the table before leaving. It's only a one-second shot, but it's completely unambiguous, I just rewatched it.

Has anybody noticed a certain arachnid theme to this season?

That's certainly a far more poetic treatment of the matter than I can muster.

IIRC, one uses "whom" when the preceding word is a preposition, e.g. Nathan Fielder played a prank on those with whom he spoke.
So no, you didn't. But whom cares?

Have you not seen the "Claw of Shame" finale to season 1?
The guy escaped Houdini style… and the threat was his pants being pulled down by robotic arms in front of a bunch of children while a police officer was present.
This is exactly the kind of thing Nathan would do for his own sake; spend an extensive amount of…