This is what I’m living for. Even though they were trying to set him up, the best they could get was “It was nice to see you. Have a good evening.” Like, I hope Abramson feels real not-cute after that.

This is the most truest statement ever. Yet there are people that pay for porn still. 

He didn’t try to date Abramson. Abramson and his fellow YDC members knew that Morse had a (extremely tame) Tinder profile that mentions neither that he is a mayor nor a professor. Abramson and his friend were supporters of Morse’s opponent. Abramson intentionally “matched” with Morse. There was no date proposed. After…

The fact that anyone pays any amount of money for content in 2020, is beyond comprehension. The entire industry could shut down, and I could watch a different video, every day, without rewatching any of them, until the end of time.

Candice Aiston is an utter scumbag of the highest order so her being wrong is unsurprising. 

Nobody below that age [25] should date anyone above it.

That random person’s take is the wrong take. Just because “people’s brains aren’t fully developed by 25" (whatever that psuedo-science means) doesn’t mean they’re incapable of having consensual sexual relationships. Maybe instead of making up the definition of “sexual predator” to suit her feelings, she would…

As someone that’s steadily dated guys 25yo and older since I began dating in college: nah.

Wait...are there other, more explicit chats, or did they indeed hook up IRL? Because that is the most benign, nothingburger exchange I have ever read. There’s nothing there that couldn’t be read aloud at Morse’s wedding or funeral.

You can, in the same way that you also can make $500 a day working from home using this one weird trick.

You may not have known, but they know full well about the stereotypes and tried to use them against him. A lot of people fell right into it. Many are reversing and apologizing. Others are doubling down. But that’s how people are on most issues, right? Cognitive dissonance.

In a(n) (un)surprising twist, her own apology for attacking someone’s “non-apology” to false accusations is itself a non-apology.

I didn’t even realize he was gay until the end of the article. Seems like they were going for the “inappropriate prof-student relationship” angle. 

It was that, too, but it’s not a coincidence that they tried to paint a gay man as a predator. That’s an old, well-established scare tactic that’s been used for decades against LGBT folks.

So you going to apologize for calling his apology “weaselly” now that it’s clear he was being pretty magnanimous to accusations made in ill-faith?

Democrats fabricating evidence-free smears using leftist identity politics in bad faith to destroy progressives? Don’t worry, must be an isolated incident. Surely it won’t happen again and again and again and again.

It seems like the DNC may be starting a shadow war with Justice Democrats, as the latter is gaining more ground every election cycle. It has been clear they do not want more progressives coming in as they are afraid of losing big money doners (more than they are afraid of losing elections is sometimes seems).

Ahhhh, homophobia knows no political affiliation. Just a perfect illustration of why LGBT folks need to keep pushing the Democrats.

I think what an awful lot of them are confusing is “I made $XXX this month” with “I have a steady source of income.” Anyone who works in creative/artistic/performing media knows that’s BS. You’re basically applying for a new job every time, or your audience will go elsewhere. 

I do not think I am. Even Jezebel got sort of into it right here. While livable, you’re definitely not getting rich doing porn.