Hey, I'm not really claiming to be any kind of wit here (Okay, I've said that this is kind of funny to me, but then I admit that my sense of humor/irony is not the finest). I just wondered how the more conservative part of fans respond to what *looks* like homoeroticism.

For the reasons you mention, I'm not saying it is in any way an erotic thing for the fighters themselves, it's just that it *looks* that way and I do think it may make some of the more conservative viewers uncomfortable.

So, a female pop culture writer gives a positive review to an episode written by a her (also female) colleague? SERIOUS BREACH OF JOURNALISTIC INTEGRITY BROES. #GAMERGATE!!!

That's pretty funny in a way. I mean, I really do not want to bash the guys you hang with or the discipline itself, which I think can be fun to watch, but the fact is that it is watched mainly by "manly men" or perhaps nerds who aspire to become ones - a largely homophobic group of people, I think. I'm not even…

I'm kinda hoping for it to become the Friday Night Lights of MMA, because why not? Still hoping that they will cast Manu Bennett at some point.

I get why we should look into the subtexts hidden into the culture we are consuming, but more and more I'm inclined to give the creators the benefit of the doubt. So, if all female characters in a movie are evil, I do not necessarily assume that this is a proof that the creators are misogynist jerks - it may be just…

Actually, I'm not watching Arrow (yet), so my comment was more about CW shows in general. I watched the first two seasons of Vampire Diaries and holy crap, it seems like they were almost embarassed of the necessity to cast anyone not young and conventionally attractive.

Even the corpses?

Gotta love the CW though, for creating its own universe where even the 'computer nerd girl' is attractive enough to make the mere mortals embarassed just by watching her.

Okay, my bad.

I've read Ishiguro because of my studies. Actually, all my British literature teachers keep saying that British prose is actually doing pretty well, or at least it has been in the 80s, but at least the authors from that decade (like Ishiguro, Atwood etc.) are still writing interesting stuff.

I watched the first series of Prime Suspect and I liked it overall, but it really dragged (my limited experience with classic British TV, which includes PS and classic Who, is much like that, by the way). I've thought it was four hours while it should have been 100 minutes.

If I can add my few cents, I'm looking forward to the upcoming book from Kazuo Ishiguro. The guy has an unparalleled ability to write about the same few themes in his every novel and SOMEHOW keep it fresh.

So, Cage: good or bad? I think this movie will serve to deepen Abed Nadir's confusion!

Vonnegut is great for teens, because he wraps up moral messages in an attractive package of irreverent humor and rebellious spirit. In that way, you are being sensitized to important matters AND you feel like you're getting away with something!

I think that many readers become tired of Vonnegut because of his absolute lack of subtlety. He makes his points as blunt as possible. I'm just 22, so I wouldn't say I really 'grew out' of him, but after being introduced to some more complex literary works, I started to find his stuff gratingly simplistic at times.

In that case, gotta commend the writers for doing that. I mean, at least they came up with something unexpected!

I've never watched Felicity (love Keri Russell in The Americans though), but it seems like it had one of the most bizarre genre shifts ever - an earnest college soap introduces a time travel storyline in its last few episodes? I love reading about the kind of weird stuff that happens on TV shows when the writers…

I definitely enjoy The Scar's characters more than I remember enjoying Perdido's. But then, I read Perdido as a 16-years old, who knows what I was thinking back then.

I would probably love Perdido Street Station now - a reread will be necessary.