Lou Bega already has lube in his name

Eww. I was at a wedding a couple of years ago, and a guy there started telling the assembled company (most of whom he'd just met) about how he'd bought a sword, and how his sex life was so great because "girls love a guy with a sword." Perhaps sensing some incredulity on the part of the audience, he then proceeded to…

Five days to think, and that's what you came back with?

Is that not what you were describing?

Then they're not feminists. Calling them that is legitimising them, delegitimising actual feminism, and muddying up the language to make way for future obfuscations and false equivalences. Let's not.

I think the term you're looking for is a "nice-guy douche." Please let's not start denouncing the term "male feminists." If that somehow turns into an insult meaning "thinly-veiled chauvinist" then feminism is really fucked.

That line genuinely put me on my back. Bravo.

Promote an event encouraging the participation of a group of people, but don't restrict others from admissions

"That attitude is why Trump won" is the political equivalent of "Daddy drinks because you cry." Except that one of those only works on people over the age of 13.

Except when those lyrics are "doo doo doo," in which case it's obviously My Semi-Charmed Life.

Slight sidetrack: it's inaccurate at best to say that Jews aren't a race. Judaism is a religion. Semitic people are a race. It is possible to be either without being the other. Jewishness, OTOH, is a complex mix of the two, which differs not only between communities, but from person to person. It's not wholly a race…

Yeah, because looking tough is what's important in life. Pretty much everything Trump does is because he's scared he'll "look weak" otherwise, and look where that's getting him.

I don't know you, but are you sure you just don't know anyone who would admit to you that they were offended by this?

Well, you know what they say: when life gives you straw, make strawmanade.

I think we're overlapping two issues slightly: whether or not it's OK for him to say it, and whether or not there should be consequences. As to the first I say no, it's not OK. As to the second, that's between him and his employer. I've no interest in "destroying" Maher; that's not for us to decide. The public has the…

I already did, five hours ago: https://disqus.com/home/dis…

I stop at "i consider this offensive." As do most of us. The additional demand "…and I demand that this person be fired" is usually not in fact said, but is implied by those who disagree, to try to make valid objections look like an assault on free speech. What happens after that is between them and their employer.…

Broadly speaking, free speech means that you can't proscribe speech on the basis of what it says or expresses. However, it's entirely appropriate to restrict speech because of what it does.

It depends what the viewers want to hear. Tomi Lahren said one liberal thing once, and was promptly banned from two shows. Not because of unacceptable behaviour, you understand - just for having the wrong views. I don't think it's hurt those shows any.

The hiring process is not speech. You can't apply free speech arguments to things that aren't speech.