My ah-ha moment was realizing I could fill the salad dressing containers with crumbled bacon for baked potatoes at home. I’ll miss that most of all.

He’s incredibly busy trying to bankrupt himself with experimental architecture these days, so we should be safe for a while.

Literally every time I have had “food poisoning” in my life it was a cover for a hangover. I don’t think it would be an exaggeration to say that about fifty percent of food poisoning-related sick days are the same.

This seems like an interesting article, but I don’t think I’ll be able to get past the use of “actressing.”

All of the ones you’ve listed were already established as actors before they did Star Wars(besides Harrison Ford, but nothing was going to stop him from being a star). People that had their big breaks with these movies haven’t all fared so well.

See, in response to the world turning to shit I was forced to get my life in order, so I would selfishly rather stick with this timeline. I’m also team burn it all and start over, and right now that is becoming a more optimistic viewpoint.

Bless your heart. Check the username.

Welp. Guess I found my next game.

Well, yes, but that only reinforces the point. 

I just think you might be overestimating the power of a sitcom. 

Yeah guys, like remember how we watched The West Wing for seven years and it fixed politics?

Seth Meyers isn’t. Amber Ruffin could be.

Thank you for clarifying. I probably wouldn’t recommend using that term, it just kind of sounds off, but...yeah, basically. I’m honestly not smart enough to get into the science side of it, but basically, while biological sex may seem like an easy binary, it is wildly more complicated.

“People who menstruate” is a perfectly cromulent phrase. It’s clear, concise, and inclusive, doesn’t distort the rules of grammar, and doesn’t use any neopronouns or language to be offended by. To take issue with the use of a phrase, to the point of using your big-ass platform to mock it, is what’s absurd.

I really don’t think there are. There are people arguing against it, and people arguing something else, but I don’t see anyone actually claiming that. 

Literally nobody thinks she meant post-menopausal women aren’t women. It was brought up as a way to illustrate that she was obviously making a statement to invalidate trans people, as there is no other logical way to interpret it.

That’s the point: by saying that “people who menstruate” should be referred to as women, means that she doesn’t consider trans identities valid, no matter how many times she claims to be an ally.

Are you using the phrase “sociological women” in place of trans women? Because if that’s your stance I don’t intend to humor you.

You’re really going on some wild(and angry) tangents to avoid the very simple point, which is, there was no reason for her to make that statement besides transphobia. She wasn’t, as has been established, trying to exclude menopausal women, there was nothing factually wrong about the article’s title, and there was…

I do love The Wire. I guess I don’t really think of it as a cop show.