Why do you think reading is so important? Or rather why do you think wanting to read is important, as you say you don't read very much? I'm not asking to be antagonistic—but the benefits you attribute to reading (education, escapism, enrichment) can be attained in other ways. I know plenty of intelligent, open-minded…

My life wouldn't be THAT much awesomer if I made more than (low) five figures a year...right? Money worries, le sigh. I hope Tami Taylor visits me in a dream tonight and gives me insightful/valuable life advice.

I'm in my twenties and grew up in New Jersey, and I can't remember whether or not I learned about Emmett Till. I took AP History and placed out of having to take any history courses whatsoever at the (very selective) college I attended. In that AP History class, I remember focusing a lot more on pre-WWII Europe. Your…

Nooooo (tell me everything).

+1

Courtesy of whatamigonnadowithagunrack.

Bravo.

Ha! Bonus points for alliteration.

Not all people name a baby because they think the name fits him. They think, "Isn't it a cool idea to name a kid Senator?" And then I meet that baby as a grown-up and he's still pissed about it.

Recycled 'em, maybe. I guess I liked a couple.

I'm not claiming I have proof that anybody was harmed in a concrete, lasting fashion. I'm saying this shit adds up: people, especially young people, are constantly exposed to the message that women = boobs. It doesn't matter how small the fraction of the Oscars' audience was children. It matters that it was broadcast…

It's ridiculous to say children should exercise adult judgment. And I do know Seth's character: he's a douche.

It's a nationally broadcast program, on a network any family with a television can watch, and the boob segment aired in the opening segment, which began between 5:30 and 8:30, depending on time zone. I'm curious why you think no children and teenagers were watching. I most definitely watched the Oscars as a child.

I have a background in educational psychology, and children and teenagers aren't typically the most critical thinkers. There are obvious exceptions. I'm just saying that hiring a host for an awards show that tons of people watch is an opportunity to get somebody who WON'T do harm, as with Amy Poehler and Tina Fey.…

Of course not. I simply disapprove of hiring somebody whose humor fluctuates between almost-undetectable satire and adolescent offensiveness to host a nationally televised event.

Fair point. I guess I'm thinking about satire in a utilitarian way—it seems like the more people get it within the audience it's geared towards (in this case, Oscar watchers), the more good it does. But I agree that more subtle satire could be more persuasive/thought-provoking to certain people, myself included, in…

Personally, I would disagree that his jokes—at least the majority of them—constituted effective satire. As for your second point, I'm definitely not saying that Seth MacFarlane is the sole perpetrator, or even among the worst perpetrators, of blanket sexism in the media. I'm much more disappointed in the people who…

Let me know if you want to have an intelligent conversation. Meanwhile, be proud that you've made my day a little bit crappier.

And I love when people think data is required to establish that humor contributing to hegemonic sexism is shitty.

Any time.