That’s great and fairly reasonable, but still doesn’t support your assertion that producers on the show didn’t, at any point, think or say amongst themselves ‘we should give that woman from Wolf Hall less money’.

Well, your bestie production company is now trying to fix this wage inequality issue that according to you does not exist. But ok. Tell me more about the starving kids in Africa.

An employer paying a female worker less than a male counterpart because they can largely get away with it and it happens to work out better for the bottom line, isn’t any less misogynistic. Sorry to break it to you. These are actual people making production decisions not capitalist drones who don’t know any better.

Yeah, they’re scumbags. I don’t know why you’re here stanning for them and trying to shift responsibility?

It’s actually not reasonable, if you’re a production company that is attempting to portray itself as being committed to equal pay (albeit after the fact). If that were true, there wouldn’t be a discrepancy in the first place and if by some circumstance there were, it would have been addressed.

The producers said…

And you know that no one explicitly thought this because...?

Oh wait, you know a few accountants. Sounds solid.

Yeah, the producers are all for ‘rebalancing of the industry’s treatment of women’ after they’ve already been exposed. Foy won the Golden Globe for season one, and her salary wasn’t renegotiated thereafter, nor was there any attempt by the production company to address this until the story became public.

Also I’m…

Time to roll out the guillotine.

It was in the script.

I agree. I know the Neoliberal Dems yell “purity tests!” every time they’re even remotely called out on virtually anything, but the line in the sand should be to exclude fucking crypto-Republicans from the party.

I don’t buy the conventional wisdom that candidates more progressive than Manchin can’t win a red state.…

As an outsider looking in, I am honestly shocked that American liberals can stress the critical importance of voter turn-out at the next election, while in the same breath express disdain at having to engage with those commies on ‘the Left’. Some weird cognitive dissonance going on there.

Anything that happens outside of the US is too provincial, apparently.

Someone should tell those women who report sexual assault and have their sexual history probed to discover how many times they’ve ‘changed partners’ that society is like, totally cool with the whole gender parity thing now. I wonder why they haven’t heard the good news yet?

I loathe Jared Leto with the intensity of 1000 suns. He is fucking awful at everything he does and, on a personal level, is a terrible human being. I try to tell people about his irredeemable awfulness whenever his name comes up, but often the My So-Called Life nostalgia thirst is too strong.

Oddly enough, I don’t think pretending that gay people don’t exist would do anything to dismantle toxic masculinity. Your argument is that having two close friends who are gay would stigmatize platonic friendships for young boys, because they consider being gay to be icky.

Maybe the problem is their socially acquired…

European colonial powers considered non-white occupants of land to be fauna, not people. That was their entire justification for eradicating indigenous people when settling somewhere. They were already racists, there was no special, post hoc justification needed. So to frame the slave trade as anything other than a…

Hmmm, obviously white colonizers wiped out indigenous populations in the first place due to white supremacist ideals like terra nullius. So you basically agree with what I said, but ultimately decide to defer to our dear friend Whiggly whose entire statement is 100% factually incorrect. Okay.

The only people who do not agree, would perhaps be the Texas Board of Education, who have repeatedly attempted to redefine the slavery trade as purely an economic exercise of European interests by rebranding it as ‘Atlantic Triangular Trade’. It is factually incorrect to do so, and I don’t know why you’re responding…

Obviously, I am not saying that at all, since the ‘economic explanation’ for drafting slaves from Africa instead of say Europe, was that there was something very particular about Africans that made them more desirable as slaves. Gee, I can’t quite place my finger on what that reason would be?

Literally no one was…

Sigh. I don’t know what exactly it is you’re ‘remembering’, but do you honestly think that all the slaves in the trade being black was just a coincidence?