An honest question:

I'm cringing at the fact that I'm defending Justin Bieber, but why would you publish something that you acknowledge is strictly "hearsay?"

Sorry, but obesity is a crisis that outweighs that generalization. Addressing the bigger picture is well and good, but until it is addressed the truth about fast food's negative health effects should be known.

Yes, poverty does lend itself to health issues, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that too much fast food often leads to obesity. Why is it a problem to call out fast food for the health issue that it is?

I don't approve of judging fat people, but I don't see any issue with statements like this one: "Bad: Fast-food workers strike in 100 cities on Thursday. Good: Obesity, Diabetes & Heart disease rates decrease on Thursday." It's not mean to anyone in particular, consuming the type of foods served at fast food…

No problem, I see now.

Which phrase did I use that you object to? If you're referring to "celebrating the awesomeness of fat," I think you meant someone else. I didn't say that.

I think you're focusing on semantics too much. In an extreme case like starvation, a twinkie can indeed be life saving. But surely you can't deny that spinach is a better food than a twinkie (in terms of healthiness and nutrition, that is)?

"there is NO ONE PROPER WAY TO HAVE A FUCKING BODY."

Well first, there's a big difference between making light of and satirizing. Plenty of media has satirized sexism and yes, those characters are often played by men. And yes, I think the same outlook applies: as long as the creator's intentions are right and they're making it clear that the sexist that they're…

Fair, people are talking about it. But yeah, I feel that there's absolutely nothing to be gained by shining a spotlight on this. This isn't a dialogue about an incident that is up for debate or a teachable moment, this is pure garbage. Anyone who would defend it is too far gone to ever learn any better.

How on earth could they have missed that?! Are they just generally not very bright?

I don't think I would go so far as to call this parody "offensive," but does it seem odd that for as long as I can remember, a reliable go-to joke has often been constructed like this: "let's take a well-known heterosexual couple/situation and swap it out with a same-sex couple/situation!" I get that these are two…

I've been to this site before, and it took me 3 or 4 articles to realize that it wasn't just really, really dedicated irony. These psychopaths are completely serious. It's frightening.

I'm not going to tell you how you should react to something. That's not my place. What I am going to say is that I think your targets are off. Yes, something like Birth of a Nation, explicitly made to promote white supremacy, is very harmful.

Sure, that is problematic. But as I see it, so long as the intent is clear and not malicious, you can't hold the artist responsible for what a fool interprets. Those people defending blackface are likely the same people who would say "nigger" and then drag out the "but how come black people can say it?" B.S. We can…

Oh sure, I said above that it's not free from criticism. My point is just that there's no reason to hold the the creators as responsible for how some idiot chooses to digest their creation.

Sorry, but I can't get behind that comparison. There's a big difference between making a silly movie and punching someone in the face.

When I said "less enlightened," I was just being polite to the people who aren't as educated as you or me.

So is there any way for a white person to satirize racism without appearing to reinforce it to you? By making RDJ's character so blatantly buffoonish as well as having a black character (and actor, of course) to demonstrate to the audience how offensive blackface is to black people, I would think that the makers of TT…