laureltreedaphne
laureltreedaphne
laureltreedaphne

@laurasaurus: If her hatred of her face kept her from going to high school or having a job, I don't understand why it would allow her to be filmed for an MTV reality show? If the idea of showing herself to a few hundred people at school was crippling, why is the idea of showing herself to a few million people OK?

@pontelo: Only if the underage daughter was an infant??? 16 year olds are autonomous. 1 month olds are not.

@NefariousNewt: My comment totally failed, because it wasn't really meant to be in defense of circumcision, but more a rebuttal of the argument that circumcision is akin to abortion. Unfortunately infants and children aren't really autonomous, and are unable to make decisions for themselves, so their parents make

Infants have decisions made for them by their parents all the time. People pierce the ears of young children, the way the umbilical cord is tied gives an inny or outy bellybutton, children are given braces or have surgical procedures to correct things - and babies are sometimes circumscribed, according to the parents

So Canada pays for socialized medicine by...having currency that's stronger than America's?

@karelj: No - but having someone do it in film, it does have phallic implications.

@AngriestGeek: You can get that something is meant to be a satire, and not feel that it's done well, without being full of shit.

@laureltreedaphne: I already let all my crazy out about this movie in the post about Chloe that was put up earlier, but I just have to say this again:

Spoiler comment in the reply.

I don't know if I believe in this girl. She can't graduate from high school or have a job, but she can have a boyfriend and agree to be filmed for MTV? What?

Porn may not be the problem, but the high level availability of hard-core porn to children at a young age, when their sexuality is being shaped, certainly strikes me as a big part of the problem. Not to sound like an old codger, but when I was growing up, the type of porn we looked at - older brother's Playboys, and

@AngriestGeek: Yeah, I get that - but Batman and Robin never kill, and in fact go out of their way to always avoid it. Whereas Hit Girl and Big Daddy not only kill, they kill joyously and un-remorsefully. Plus, I don't think there was much discussion about what Big Daddy had done to Hit Girl, aside from that quick

@Cairn: Yes, but generally the enemies in the movie are worse than the good guys. In this, the level of violence (and the joy that was taken in that violence) by the main characters far exceeded that of the supposedly bad characters, and I saw it as sort of a love story about violence. I realize that violence as

I saw it over the weekend and was pretty disgusted, as was my boyfriend. Judging from the audience reaction around us, we were in the extreme minority, but I felt it was a morally reprehensible film, and not because an eleven year old uses bad language. It glorified violence, and violence as entertainment, in a really

Haven't we known about tanning addiction for a while - hence the phrase "tanorexia"?

That's taking impersonation a little too seriously...

Alan is one of the nicest, most women-positive guys in the world - so excited to see him on here!