Nah, you’re the one misconstruing this (arrogantly, at that). If you weren’t, you wouldn’t have to change the word right to “deserve.” Pretty simple.

I mean, fundamentally, are you saying there is nothing that would influence you? That seems to be the position you’re taking, but I don’t think that’s the case.

That’s a whole ‘nother ball of wax. Suffice to say: I have seen Ender’s Game, because the book was a big deal to me when I was a kid. Orson Scott Card did not get any money from me.

Yes, and that’s what I was getting at. While they’re still alive you can’t/shouldn’t separate the art from the artist because the art necessarily supports the artist. Though, to be frank, I’m not going to find his jokes as funny given his behavior. His jokes about understanding of things like white privilege, when…

Bullshit. He hasn’t “suffered” at all. It’s not “suffering” that people know what he did. Not making more millions is not “suffering”, or else everybody on this website has suffered more than him. Nobody’s arguing for censorship, the argument is there’s plenty of people who aren’t assholes who could be supported, so…

My mistake. You said repeatedly that if you’re supporting the likes of CK, you’re not supporting artists who are better people, leading me to think you thought of this as an ‘either or’ type deal.

Honestly, you’re the one being dishonest. You misconstrue Che’s statement that he has a right to speak and make a living as “deserves” (quotes yours, for some reason) to make a living.

Who says you can’t support more than one artist at a time?

I don’t think someone’s opinion is dishonest just because you happen to disagree with it.

I think you’re confusing disagreement over whether or not Louis CK’s punishment was sufficient (you think it wasn’t whereas I don’t feel particularly angry about his attempt at a comeback) with the overall unfairness of very talented people who never get a break.

You’re already in the blacks, so I won’t be bringing you out of them to reply. Though I’m normally in the greys, I have no interest in elevating the troll/dishonest responses, so I guess you’re the one I’m going to respond to.

He “deserves to make a living”, Che? Well, he already made plenty of money, so...fuck right off. He made plenty of living. And nobody is recommending that McDonald’s not hire him. They’re just saying hey, maybe he doesn’t need--or deserve-- to be a famous fucking comedian getting millions of dollars of support. 

My biggest problem is my giant flat feet. I killed my Birkenstocks in like a year and can't justify getting another pair. 

I mean, that’s a fair point vis-a-vis the people who defend even after the evidence is leaked, but overall, letters defending abusers on nebulous “I haven’t seen the evidence but I know they’re innocent” grounds should always be condemned, and are always the same, so I don’t really see why it’s worth pointing out; you…

Not to be pedantic and I think we agree completely, but wouldn’t that situation also be a subordinate? Just not a direct subordinate. 

There’s nothing maternal about what she was saying. And, just to be clear, he says:

How is that different than any other shitty defense-of-abuser letter?

Don’t. Fuck. Or. Try. To. Fuck. Subordinates.

I don’t think telling her to move her racist ass is ableist. Telling her to move because she gets anxious-to-the-point-of-not-functioning around people is (arguably) ableist (I mean...is telling people with pacemakers to not stand next to microwaves ableist? At a certain point, it’s a brute fact), but I fell like that…

Paramedics rushed to a local hospital and performed surgery.