Yeah, no. Dog food choice is not the same as name-calling, and it is presumptuous and judgey to tell people what to buy just because you can afford to make choices. (A note that I buy my pets expensive, high-quality stuff because I can, but if I couldn't afford it, I'd do the best I could with the cheaper options…

Why? (and I don't mean "why is Alpo horrible?" but "why do you need to be 'that person'?") I doubt there would have been a massive run on Alpo by Jez commenters because Laura used a brand-name that's nearly generic for dog food (a la Kleenex) in her post.

YES! This is just a genius episode. It's the one I always think of when this question comes up.

Well, your logic seems peculiar. You seem to want people to be convicted because they seem guilty but can't be proven so [or you at least want people to be angry that this conviction-without-proof didn't happen or at the very least you seem to want this particular woman to be in jail in spite of the lack of proof for…

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess habitat-based evolutionary differentiation.

I wonder how you create super-cool enlightened male feminist liberal men? Maybe by working for opportunities which help redefine societal norms over time and lead to a more equal future for everyone? Your approach of just be reflexively negative could work, too, though.

I will never understand why guys feel that who they find attractive is information that MUST BE SHARED! Did this kind of thing used to save lives in prehistoric times?

Perfect.

Translation: "Derp."

If you've ever tried to make any piece of clothing from a pattern (especially something with sleeves) in your life, you will understand this expression.

As long as you're as sick at the thought of allllll the people who've served years in jail and even died serving time for crimes it was later proven they didn't commit — all because the cops and prosecutors were so sure they were right they didn't bother to do their damned jobs.

Age of Innocence in which she was brilliant. I hated The Piano anyway but the "Aw, isn't she darling!" awarding of the Oscar to a child who didn't play a role requiring her to make a lot of choices instead of to someone whose performance showed real depth, nuance, and skill was just insulting.

I pretty much always think about this as the time the Academy gave a tiny little girl Winona Ryder's Oscar to play with.

Funny how it's always the girls people notice being Mary Sues.

I never said it was. I simply said that's how the book ended. There was a faint implication in the article that this was some kind of secret unknown twist to the film's story, but I imagine it ended up in the original script because there had been some loose attempt at some point at adapting the book rather than…

I don't think that needs to be implied or that showing them recovering means anything more than that they survived and are trying. They went through a horrible thing and lost their father/husband. Of course they are irreparably damaged. Even when you heal after a terrible wound, there is always a scar.

I never said I cared that they were different, but I know a lot of people do. I am not one of them. I was just saying they were *really* different.

They're so different. I did a paper on them for a film class back in college (novel-reading and film-watching for class credit!) and IIRC that was my biggest takeaway — hard to compare; Venn diagram overlaps very little!