It's called taking the low road. Enjoy the view down there.

It would certainly solve your problem of having to demonstrate something that never happened. You probably want all the people who point our your glaring failures at logic to die in a fire. I'm sure you think you're a very tolerant person.

*sigh* Here is the way a grown-up reads that movie:

No it isn't because it's comedy. It isn't the real world. It's like shaming someone for laughing when a comic slips on a banana peel.

It was never creepy. Do you really have to be a grown-up to get Overboard wasn't about rape and was just a silly comedy starring a husband-and-wife team clearly rehashing the tropes of the 1930's?

Was Goldie Hawn ever used sexually while she was comatose? Nope.

Consent was never skirted. He didn't use her for sex. He used her for housekeeping.

It was never rapey because he never raped her, or wanted to. He didn't do it for sex.

It's a hilarious movie, but there is a kind of person symbolized by the SCTV parody "Make Joan Baez Laugh" who won't find it funny at all.

Anything about clickbate as a kind of trolling? Because the AV Club is all enmeshed in that shit today.

I didn't see this before my last response, so you may have flamed me in your response to that. No big deal, and I'm not going to reply in turn; there's no reason for you and I to go off on each other, and I'll accept my part of the blame for us doing so.

Second ad hominem. You're really bad at this. Maybe this is why you have to block people you don't agree with. You don't know how words work.

That wasn't the ad hominem. What sort of responses did you think an article like this would draw (one more reason not to have run it)? But either ignoring the post or demonstrating your intellectual superiority would have been infinitely superior to now giving them the satisfaction that they "got" to the liberals, and…

Ad hominem. Second rhetorical fail.

Nothing demonstrates the superiority of your (and my) position like forbidding another to express an alternative one. Rhetorical fail.

I doubt you begin to believe in the stuff—but I do think you become numb to what it represents.

See, I think this article is the exact opposite of responsible. Why are you putting a spotlight on—and increasing awareness of—an at best fringe group of musicians? There are always going to be racists and there are always going to be racist organizations—just as there are always going to be other unsavory, immoral,…

It's Brave New World. When we're listening to techno music, it's Metropolis.

I agree.

Is that the only choice? Well, I've got to go with collapse of it all, because this site has become such a pale shadow of its former self, it almost has no reason for being anymore.