To properly satirise that dreadful article you would have needed to end your sentences with prepositions, overused commas and left more dangling modifiers. Whomever edited that piece was terrible.

No, she was unclear on who she was satirising and I think as a woman and feminist that’s quite a big fuck up, tbh. But the trajectory was so much more about entitlement that it’s a shame that the identity markers included pushed it into a female voice.

Well I suppose this is what I like about it. It’s pure satire but still manages to accumulate an amalgam of enough “think piece” type phrases and complaints to mimic the style without saying anything in particular. It could be any complaint: the recent ‘zionists’ article, the many complaining men re: the women’s…

I like it!

I feel a bit sad that an adult finally stepped in and slapped down Agrawal for being terrible. There was so much grapevine eye rolling and head shaking around her it was kinda delightful.

I live outside the US and I can count in my personal circle 8 different people who had planned to go to the US this year and have decided agains it simply because there is no draw anymore and the culture seems awful to them

I do think Lena is a bit gross. I don’t think she raped anyone. But I know it’s an ongoing rumour about her.

Rapist? Eh? Are you thinking of Lena Dunham?

The special was terrible. I was cringing. I want to be more supportive when she’s up against this bs but it was truly not funny.

That posted as a link. Thanks.

Silly Schmoopie. He can’t be snorting coke. He’s broke! He’s in negative balance!

wat

I thought long and hard about this and Gizmodo had already covered it by the time Jez did. I think the Giz article was probably newsworthy for their site, and leaving it without a sister article would have been odd.

I basically realised this solely bc I was like Riverdale? Why does that sound so fucking familiar?? Then I was falling asleep one night and thought (as you do) “It’s the school in the Archie comics” and then fell asleep.

I can totally see AJ sleeping under a bridge. Where the hell is that guy?

This is such a reductive way of looking at the way children learn. This is not “putting them in the shoes of oppressors” it’s getting them to research images and reproduce them. The point of the reproduction is to reinforce the significance and reality of the imagery.

What the fuck? I’m not the one being aggro here. Whatever.

Right. And I’m clarifying that I think this is an actually entirely different hermenuetic strategy rather than Elliot done wrong. The slave and master game goes back to Ancient Greece. It’s not the same but badly done, in any sense other than maybe one is more effective or complete than the other.

You should look up simulacrum. Stassa uses it in the article and it might be useful for you to express what you mean here. It’s a fascinating concept.