That cracked me right up. Loved it. There was really some good comedy in this episode, though most of it unintentional.

“June’s glowering alone is so transparent as to be almost comic.“

Good Trouble is truly a joy. I didn’t expect to like it because I was all about Stef and Lena on The Fosters and was pretty sour on Callie, but they’ve really nailed it. 

But a 36-year-old is a millennial?

Aaaaah! Throw me in a vat of acid!

Damn, people are much better at remembering characters and their names than I am. I have no idea who most of the people are that everyone’s talking about.

I’m not concerned about her manipulations, they’re acceptable in the circumstances.

Yes, the Waterfords have done many even more horrific things to her since the book narrative ended. Really no place for the line here.

She didn’t just fall off the turnip truck, it’s true, but she’s used to the violence of her world, a world where she’s comfortable and has some power. She was alone in a room with a world-renowned photographer and knew full well to get what she wanted, she had to yield to him in a manner that left her vulnerable in a…

“What’s it like for her to be in that home that’s no longer hers?” I don’t get it — when did Emily live there? They live in Canada now!

Ahhh, what a fun comments section, I think I’ll go to Breitbart now for even more of a good time!

Yeah, so far I don’t really get the searing criticism — I thought the first episode was pretty much all the things the show shouldn’t do, but the 3 episodes since then have been pretty decent.

I have to admit I was disappointed that Al turned out to be just another bad guy with an ulterior motive. It was more fun that just a half-decent person could see right through Blaine’s nonsense immediately.

After this episode and contemplating dropping the show altogether, I think I’ll just skip everything in Gilead and just watch the Canada scenes.

I always got the impression that the Marthas (both on the show and in the book) were just infertile, unmarried women who had some indiscretions but none so criminal as what they deemed worthy of the whorehouse or the ....other place, whatever it’s called. But maybe I’m forgetting something.

I’m going to correct myself here. Apparently some of it was true but I stand by how absurd it is. Kids aren’t supposed to spend a decade in prison for beating someone up.

Repeatedly.

He has also said that even if they didn’t do it, they were in the park generally assaulting folks willy-nilly (you know, “wilding”) so they are bad men anyway. Which is absurd even if true, but no such charges were pressed and no such allegations/admissions were ever made. He just decided it.

It is. And I get that now, but this was a review of the first episode where there was none of that!

An appropriate response!