Ahhh Appalachia. That makes sense then. I'm so sorry. But glad it worked out in the end!

Yikes, you must have had a terrible education. That is standard high school history

Sure. Agreed. Don't do things that are terrible for the environment. But also don't pretend like something has horrible unknown catastrophic health problems because it's.... [gasp] made out of plastic!!

...anything that you can't ingest shouldn't be topically applied? So, if an antifungal cream, or a moisturizer, or anything like that was less than healthy for me to gobble up, terrible things will happen if I put it on my skin? That's really silly.

Obviously some chemicals are terrible, some are great, and this one is awful for the environment. The idea that because it's a chemical you shouldn't be using it though is just as idiotic as the idea that because it's a chemical it's 100% safe. I was responding specifically to the former.

Sorry (and I mean that sincerely), I guess I misinterpreted your original tone. It's hard not to read someone going "I am so over them" in a kind of huffy, eye-rolly, snooty tone. But yeah, I let that last line overshadow the actual content of the post.

My above comments still stand though, just not @ you…

I mean, God, if you're a female celebrity and you pull a Beyonce and you work hard to craft this perfect public image, everyone orgiastically celebrates any little crack that appears in it, celebrates the destruction of that image (as they did with the whole Elevatorgate or whatever we're calling it). If you do the…

It's extremely weird that the Tolkien estate is ok with stuff like this that is so incredibly distant from Tolkien's vision.

You mean the weirdly sexist article shaming extremely successful women throughout history who happened to all be accepted as "cool" ? Because an author (on Buzzfeed!) told you "there are other people in history like her and like you, and the latter historically liked the former and that's terrible," you've stopped…

But that sounds like a chemical! All chemicals are bad, God made us to only use natural things, like hummus and nightshade

so then the boast was accurate? His books are published by a publishing company and his films are distributed by film companies? Both necessary things if he wanted any people to actually ever read/watch them?

What I think this question is asking (and why I clicked on this link in the first place) is "as a college graduate I have no experience. I can find no job openings that require anything less than ___ years of experience. This is an extremely common problem for the entire millennial generation, how do I overcome this…

Ah, ok. Thanks! I do think that, though it'd be clearly absurd for jezebel to devote an article to obscure legal doctrines, in an article that talks about Sotomayer's opponents complaining that her position has no legal foundation, it should at least mention that there is indeed a legal foundation, and what that…

So what I see in this article (and the quoted portion of Sotomayor's opinion) is arguments over whether or not Affirmative Action is a good thing. I'm wondering, where's the opinion claiming that this law was actually unconstitutional? I'm pretty sure the SCOTUS isn't supposed to decide which laws are the best for the…

Impossible, as the entire fifth book itself contains no spoilers, as absolutely nothing happens.

I love the dueling io9 and jezebel headlines.

Ok. I did misread your earlier comments— you don't find it objectionable that he's popular, but that he's popular in a culture only that embraces mediocrity.

I'm working on my PhD in english literature, and you're just kind of wrong?

From having extremely popular serialized works, to a tendency to constantly tour and perform his works, Gaiman and Dickens seem to have quite a bit in common.

Wait, is jezebel asserting that Paglia needs a "source" for the assertion that gender has no basis in biology? That seems pretty cissexist.