I think Archer's first season was really just "good" for the most part. Compared to what followed, anyway. Doesn't stack up against B99's, at any rate. Conchords I would say yes, although I didn't know they had a radio series beforehand. Still, TV is different enough from radio that I think it still oughtta count.

Hahaha, a paleontologist supervillain. And he'd probably only be a supervillain because of the shabby treatment that he got when he was just a regular, well-meaning paleontologist.

I don't know. Joey got mocked a lot in the early days before he made it onto TV, when he was performing in terrible plays, butt-doubling for Al Pacino, and modeling for VD PSAs; one might say he was "not a real actor," like Ross was always "not a real doctor." And I'd say Ross got mocked for the paleontology stuff not…

<3

Fair enough, but I don't think the fact that some people use those words to define their own misguided sociological views means that it's wrong for others to use those same words as simple shorthands for certain personality types without hierarchical implications or prescriptions. If some people use a certain word in…

For some reason I thought last week's Girls was the season finale, and I wondered why there was no mention of that here. And the show did have sort of a season finale-ish feel to it, with Hannah seeming determined to ruin her life, though I missed the ending, which probably would've let me know that it wasn't over…

Oh, I totally see where the article's coming from, and I certainly agree with it. I can't remember on my own whether Boyle really has been overly persistent with Rosa (and I've missed an episode or two); but whether or not that's true, the article's larger point is no less valid.

But is it hierarchical? The letter A is neither superior nor inferior to the letter B. That you're defining betas as "probably superior" (how?) to alphas seems to contradict the idea of hierarchy.

But the need or non-need of moral justifications for your actions isn't something you can just choose. Either that's the way your brain instinctively works, or it isn't. In humans, it isn't. And even if it were, our capacity to rationalize our behavior, combined with the disparity between the size of the world and the…

Relevant: https://twitter.com/Rickand…

Mrs. Sullivan was some disturbing shit.

Ahhh, very good point!

Astronaut Wives Club
_____________
Dexter

Then the particulars of a refusal do have meaning, cool. But how about Andy's behavior after he shared that hospital kiss with Ann, and April told him flat-out that she didn't want to be with him (I think "No" might've been the full text of what she said after he revealed that kiss)? Neither their pre-existing…

We don't seem to need moral justifications to do many of the things we do. And morality doesn't have anything to do with classifying men as alphas or betas.

They certainly are similar themes.

None of the Friends' jobs ever really appeared glamorous, aside from Joey's stint on Days of our Lives, and maybe that war movie with Gary Oldman's character. They certainly seemed like easy jobs, for the most part (barring Monica's unruly subordinates or… well, Chandler's job), but not glamorous. I'm not sure whether…

I guess I wouldn't know. Nothing is universal, but what you and @avclub-7638ca8ac63c145195788f998393b1fa:disqus describe seems like such a weird thought process that I have a hard time imagining it to be very common. Perhaps I give people too much credit.

Are April Ludgate and Andy Dwyer both bad people, as well? Andy rejected April's initial advance, but she tried again; and then Andy got into the idea, but he kissed Ann before they had really solidified as a couple, at which point April said no; but Andy continued the pursuit. It all worked out in the end, and they…

"Sue me!? But Daphne's the one who left you at the altar!" One of those classic Frasier 180s.