Alyssa’s stint as a judge was so entertainting. She understands their experience firsthand and did an excellent job of communicating with the queens in both practical and psychological matters in a way they could truly relate to. I would love to see her as Drag Race’s resident Miss Jay.

My greater point is that despite my intimate connection to that community, I’ve never heard anyone describe it as a derogatory. Multiple sources from that community continue to insist that it’s a neutral descriptive for which any pejorative meaning is only determined by the intent of the user, not unlike “queer,” or…

Half of my immediate family and multiple significant others continue to self-refer in this way. You’ll forgive me if I choose to defer to those with whom I’m intimately connected over an anonymous internet persons.

Yes, it’s how they casually refer to themselves.

Underneath the hair plugs and the jillion dollars, Musk is really just an aspie tech nerd bro. He’s just as awkward as all the other Silicon Valley dudes I dated for four months.

I love that quote. It’s such a great encapsulation of the show’s original ethos.

I have Hulu! What’s the episode title?

Internet gaslighting 101.

Does anybody else agree that Forehead Tittaes is far and away Marion Cotillard’s best work and wish she would venture into more comedic roles?

Or maybe you might want to recalibrate your aim.

Wait, who’s doing what to whom now?

They generally denote either sarcasm or direct quotes, neither of which was applicable to your usage.

But the original Rossane would NOT have said she didn’t care. Does no one remember the ep she also didn’t like her son dating a black kid?

And that’s because Roseanne Conner isn’t a real person, but a character who represented specific ideals, and there’s a natural expectation that a reboot would honor the ideals that attracted its original fanbase. Instead suddenly, Roseanne’s not really Roseanne, just All in the Family with a female lead. It’s a…

How did you manage to put something I never said in quotes? I believe that her tact and decreased demand are not mutually exclusive. How’s that for nuance?

It is possible to wrap your head around it and still lament it, you know. Most have us have been doing the same for our own parents over the last few decades.

Oh, for criminy’s sake. She explicitly states that she declined to offer dresses for the season. And obviously there are actresses and industry people still willing to support her brand.

It’s a very weird take that I come across with alarming frequency on a supposedly feminist site. Apparently, if a woman’s marriage affords her any opportunity beyond simple love and joint tax returns, she’s obligated to accept all manner of abuse, humiliation, and forfeiture of all respect and human empathy in…

I’m not terribly pleased by her centering herself in the interview’s narrative, although she seems to indicate some awareness by not offering her clothes for awards season. Hopefully she’ll do more going forward.

Let’s not play the “please point to me where” game. Perhaps you should consider your comments more fully in the context of this thread, as the one I initially responded to clearly suggests her direct complicity, and greys in support of your comment seem to suggest she should suffer some kind of loss. Of course I’m not…