He clearly put a bit of himself in Xander. I won’t deny that. I also won’t deny that that Xander’s “lie” was at least a little bit out of jealousy. People often make decision based on a number of factors, some nobles, other less. But this whole idea that somehow he (and the viewers) HAD to trust Buffy, despite Buffy…

Thank you. The same goes for his works too:

While this idea is terrible, remember that there is no guarantee this idea would have made it into an episode intact. Judging an artist by the ideas they had instead of the one they executed on is not a good idea. Everyone has a ton of bad ideas. What important is the ideas that are made reality.

Xander took Buffy’s choice away at the end of season two by lying to her and telling her that Willow encouraged her to kill Angel. But through the whole series, Xander was the “good guy”.

Yeah, maybe, but if/when he does, I guarantee you that it won’t have an Avengers-sized budget or success. The guys best years are behind him. He created something truly game changing and progressive (but not wihtout flaws) in 1997, and was able to direct one massive, really damn fun blocksbuster (but one not without…

As someone whose English is also their second language and who had people dismiss me using a similar line in the past (despite the fact that I wrote an entire Ph.D. thesis in English and speak English daily), that comment pissed me right off. All I could think off was “And how many second language do you speak, buddy?”

Yeah, no. That kind of revisionist history is unnecessary. Buffy wasn’t just praised for its progressiveness by some deluded female fans, it also was praised by scholars and academics. People who know their stuff. Are you saying they were all wrong? No. Buffy was truly progressive in 1997, thanks to a lot of factors,…

Oh, Whedon is done. I was a fan, and I will still defend a lot of his work, even acknowledging its flaws (I don’t subscribe to the “Buffy was sexist all long, you all got deceived!” school of thought. Buffy was a progressive show...for 1997. But thanks in part to shows like Buffy, our standards are higher now. And…

It was consent in the sense of “The contrat we have with Reeves to use his likeness didn’t consent to this, so if we do nothing he could sue us”

CDPR deleted it because they didn’t want to risk Reeves sueing them. They didn't do it as a favor to Reeves. They did it to legally cover their ass. 

“the implications of there being different rules for whether or not a real celebrity is used as the basis for a character or if it’s spun from whole cloth.”

While it was recuperated by right-wing ghouls like Carlson, let’s not forget that that 4W website who wrote the first hit piece about is not rightwing. It’s TERFy. They frame the whole research as “yet more evidence that trans people are just men trying to normalize crimes against women and girls”. They are as despicab…

And do not forget that small deranged slice of feminism that happily jumps in bed with the right-wing on both of these subjects.

Uh, uh, and do you have your knife unsheated in your hands, ready to use? Because that’s what Rittenhouse was doing.

But you should. Why would someone carry a gun if not to use it? There’S a reason nobody carry axes or machetes or knives to the grocery store either. Like I said, from a Canadian perspective, the idea that someone just having an AR-15 downtown being normal is absolutely insane. 

Running around putting out fires/offering to help medically isn’t parading around with it.

And so they deserved the death penalty as carried out by a vigilante?

As a Canadian, this verdict is absolutely insane to me. You guys know it's not the Wild West anymore, right?

Oh, absolutely. He’s on Tucker Carlson within the week. He’ll absolutely be hailed as a “law and order” figure, even though a teenage vigilante is the exact opposite of law and order. 

The Mask was a thing from another story.