I always had the theory that The Crying Game was a remix of Oedipus Rex. There's a kind of prophecy (the scorpion story), then he kills a man, then takes up with the man's wife, not knowing her true nature.

I feel like so many of the answers really dodge the question. They tell instances that you were spoiled, but not really instances where spoilers ruined the experience.

There's a strange way that Craig is kind of like Ron Swanson. If he were a real person, Ron Swanson would be impossible to deal with; he's stuck in his way of perceiving the world, he's inflexible, he's strangely high-maintenance. But there's commitment to the character's worldview that makes it work for the show. I…

Except that Tori Amos said that in 2009. How long is "not for long"?

I cannot figure out why I found that line so funny, but I did.

Yeah! They're prawns of Satin! That's why I will never follow the tenements of Muslinism.

Yeah, I thought it might go the way that Louise figures out how alike they are and makes a friend, also with bunny ears. But glad they didn't.

Especially when she says "Bumper to bumper."

I thought that too. Wasn't sure after reading Dan's response. I'm not sure if it changes the response, but it makes the idea a little less gross.

I find the hashtags strange too, but they seem to be here to stay. Perhaps rather than implying, "To our Twitter-using viewers, we suspect you might not be smart enough to think of a hashtag on your own, so maybe try this one," it's just planting the idea in people's heads, "Hey, maybe I could tweet about this!"

I had been thinking about this trend when reading the part of "SuperFreakonomics" about the concept of declared preferences and revealed preferences. There's sometimes a big gap between what people say they want and what they actually pursue. So when cable TV was booming, people declared that they wanted to watch…

I just realized something about Rupert. Perhaps the two-edged sword of Rupert is that he is the most committed to the theme of whatever season he's in. So when the theme of the season is "pirates," he's in full pirate mode, and it's kind of corny but still captivating. But when the theme is "Heroes and Villains," he's…

I am so glad they didn't bring Russell back this season. Because he'd have to bring another Hantz with him, and we know how that has turned out.

I tend to think it's about conversation skills. Of course, conversation is a two-way street, so if a conversation dies it isn't necessarily one person's fault.

I especially like that his assumption that someone who made him breakfast would be a butler. Not that the assumption that a married man would have his wife make breakfast isn't totally gender-biased, but it doesn't cross his mind to say, "Because I'm single and live alone, I have to do it myself."

Maybe she's thinking of Rihanna. Which would be funny.

This comment is a prime example of out-of-context quoting. If you read the entire sentence that includes the word "funniest," it's pretty clear that it's not saying "When I want to see a movie about genocide, I come for the laughs." Being funny as such is a "dubious honor," as he writes.

A plush character created by Jim Henson for a TV series in the 1980s. What's a fraggle?

Maybe the normalcy of "partner" is why I like it. It's a practical term to describe a common relationship. It's not like, I don't know, you're invited to a party and you say, "Is it okay if I bring my soulmate?" Of course, in my case I replace it with the even more practical term "Steve."

I think there are hangups about all the words. I wouldn't have a problem with someone using the word "husband" in a state where it's not legally recognized; it's gender-specific enough to get the gist. Still, I don't like using it. "Husband." Slightly better than "hubby," but still sounds overly domestic for me.