HThe irony is that there are plenty of women who would be into a dude with money regardless of what he looks like. McClure is either too lazy to find them or he gets off on foisting himself on unsuspecting women. (My guess is the latter.)

Beauty and the Beast is a movie about an independent and intelligent young woman who falls in love with the man who kidnaps and abuses her because she feels she can change him. Glad you enjoyed the two seconds of implied gayness.

This sucks. It’s performative feminism. Not the real deal. This is a classic ride and it was always low key awesome that it featured a depiction of the horrors of human trafficking. Some may see an attempt to empower, but I see the erasure of a class of women from the narrative.

Thanks for the Spoiler in the headline, you dumbfuck.

Someone may be about to plummet to their death. Everybody get your cameraphones.

And as much as I do feel for his family - the fact that he won’t be around to torture more animals is still good enough reason for me not to feel sorry or sad that he’s dead. I have sympathy for his child, I don’t feel any sympathy for him. And I think that is both morally right and completely justifiable. I also…

Disingenuous horseshit. It’s not a culturally relativistic argument to have empathy for people brought up in other cultures, even if you denounce as wrong some of their traditions, which is all Rohan has done.

Am I hallucinating, or did the person who earlier accused me of thinking “animal abuse for entertainment is a positive thing” because I expressed sympathy for the family of a dead bullfighter just lecture me on my ability to make reasonable, emotionally intelligent inferences?

How is the quoted remark inane? :)

Right. That’s your take on the initial comment. We’ve covered that. You keep dodging the second one, however. Here, I’ll paste it again:

That’s the one. I’m still waiting on your explanation for why this part is inane though, since you literally said, right after I wrote it: “So, it’s inane.” :)

Then I’ll explain! :)

Not once, and you know it.

No, dear. We can all read the thread. You specifically said the above quoted paragraph was inane. If you’d like to admit that was not the case I’d welcome it by way of an apology. If you still think it was inane... I once again invite you to illustrate how.

So it would seem. Best you exit as graciously as possible. Good day.

Not at all! It’s a way of saying the following, which you’ve also claimed is inane:

You can pretend you’re trolling, but we both know the truth: You can’t answer the question, and you’ll drive the whole thing into the dirt if you have to so as to avoid admitting it.

I am? When?

Yes, that’s correct.

Because my original comment about relativism and its limits, which so seemed to bother you, was made in response to someone saying, again: