Ah, I see it now. My apologies. I truly am blind, but mostly sleepy. Please do not slight my infirmity.

Snappy comeback, and it's not like I lose sleep over Jonah Hill's prejudices, but there's no apology mentioned in the writeup. You're misattributing that to an older statement.

Wow, these two are annoying—the embodiment of both hipster racism and of the couple that makes out in public just so YOU KNOW.

Did everyone hallucinate an apology or am I blind?

Fair point, but is there one aspect of the Hunger Games that's detached from it as a consumer product that has made those associated with it very very rich. It's a corporate franchise in multiple mediums. It's common for mass entertainments to reflect the social sentiment of their time (in this case, the exploitation…

I don't get the attitude that the Hunger Games should be beyond exploitative merchandising. It's not like it's Schindler's List. It may deal with "serious themes" (sort of), but it's no more serious than the average escapist product.

I like cats fine. They seem to like me. I can, however, understand why people might not like them. But people who dislike dogs for reasons other than fear or allergies are ALWAYS assholes.

Some people have helper dogs and they're allowed to go places with them because they have disabilities.

No, the "all" is assumed. If someone said, "Men have dicks," a guy without a dick would feel he wasn't included as a man. If someone said, "Women have breasts," a woman who recently had hers removed would feel unjustly excluded from that group. "Trees grow fruits." Well, actually, they don't always.

"Not all people who make broad generalized statements of any group without qualifiers are thinking about people as mindless entities in a group."

Intelligent people do understand that, but stupid people say it. And note, I'm not including you as one who would say such things, because I'm not completely socially incompetent. But thanks.

I guess. Lets make out.

Semantics.

Only two people have ever used this term. You're one of them.

"Your response says much more about you than the writer of the post."

I should hope.

"Anyone who doesn't wish to "partake" (I think you mean "participate")"

You ain't have to mansplain.

I don't disagree with that entirely (like, it holds some kernel of truth), but that also isn't to say that any broad statement directed toward a gender/racial/social group is going to be universally true, and should accept to be swallowed without protest. We need to start dealing with people as people. And it gets…

Generalizations are like a security blanket for people who are afraid of the complexity of different people and of forming real thoughts. And I realize that in itself is a generalization, but that's just the way I feel.

Any time somebody makes a broad generalized statement of ANY group, without qualifiers, expect someone who doesn't wish to partake in thoughtless binaries to answer with "Not all..." That's life on Planet Earth.

Yes, the Protective Knights of Male Whitedom are annoying, but most people who are intelligent would rather…

I think that's exactly what he's doing. In which case, I guess, I still liked it at a visual surface level. But who's to say a music video can't go deeper? Haha.