Dude, she makes the videos off a backing track and sometimes holds it wrong because her dancing requires it or because she's recording a clip that will be put in slo-mo, which is hard to match up to the song. See also: the fact that she has videos of her playing the violin in the rain.

Your reply was toughtful and level-headed. It's clear you don't agree with me and maybe even don't respect my motivations and decisions, but you never insulted me because of that. I am truly, truly grateful.

This was an article about how a woman thinks it stinks that men try to shut down her ability to speak with threats and epithets. I commented that I also hate having epithets used against me. You respond to me with epithets. Those two metaphorical ships continue to pass in the night...

Right, because it's immature to decide whether to support or aid someone based on how they ask for it. Because that's not a good indicator of the tenor of the rest of the interlocution. Oh, and "No one cares" makes little sense if you're spending time to reply to me.

Agreed. I don't understand how anyone thinks they're going to get what they want from the Patriarchy/1%/WASPs by ascribing to them, in person, these dehumanizing and vilifying names.

To those who'd like to know: What he's saying is that a moral is a command of action, not a statement of fact.

People are calling Hitler a Catholic, so I feel like posting this:

It's "It's 'hear, hear.'" ;)

HERE, HERE. Deserved to be cancelled, anyway...

Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. -Romans 13:1

Talked with my pre-law friend. Turns out you're right. I concede defeat.

Stupid. The message this sends is that it's wrong for a woman to have the kind of fantasies or desires that Ana Steele (or E. L. James, for that matter) has. I do not envy any woman who has "alternative" sexual preferences and has to navigate the battlefield of women who champion their right to do anything and others…

Good guy Rick Berg, sticking to his guns and not answering a question he'd never have to answer anyway, since he's not a judge.

I wonder if taking entire articles to belittle men who talk about their feelings and emotional responses doesn't hamstring any later arguments this site makes against men who do that same thing to women.

You could kinda tell the filmmakers didn't think they had actors or whatever else capable of showing anything really interesting, so what we get is a combination of "Hey, I'm letting you out, like I said I would and then did in the movie proper" and "Hey, you want some cameos? Everyone loves cameos!"

Then please don't respond to my posts.

What does it even mean to be on a news and opinion website "in good faith"? And I'd love to see you point out where my concern was.

I didn't miss the point. I got the point, found it lacking in logic and utility, and thus discarded it. You are welcome to disagree with me (as you obviously do), but don't you think it's in the best interests of your argument to try to convince me instead of just castigating me for not thinking the way you do already?

I clicked on your name and checked out other comments you've replied to. You've seemingly only picked rational, measured arguments to castigate with the dehumanizing "troll," and most people have elegantly retorted. It seems there's nothing I could say that hasn't already been said, and better on many occasions. I'd…