That just confirms that some idiot who really liked boondock saints knows how to edit a wiki.

Dog owners are stupid. That’s all. Now you understand.

Wtf is wrong with people? Him for obvious reasons and her for, by the end of her letter, sounding like she was already second-guessing herself and about ready to jump into a decades-long abusive relationship with the loser?

You want to presume innocence before guilt is proven?!? 

The fuck do you think should have happened in this case?

meh. sylistically, there’s been some unique expression, and there appear to have been maybe two female artists. Kennedy’s portrait makes these look staid.

I guess it’s like an “eye of the beholder” thing, then. Everybody just make up whatever nonsense you want to justify the poor artistic rendering. Uh...it doesn’t look like her because...uh...she’s the EVERYWOMAN! Yeah, we’re supposed to all see ourselves in her!

“Profound rethinking,” yet...they’re just neither of them very good. On the other hand, this is the first time I’ve spent even half a second thinking about the portrait of any former president/first lady, so that’s something, I guess.

He should kill himself. Then they’ll be sorry they mistreated him, and they’ll ban...themselves.

At the end of that second technical, he gives the angriest high-five i’ve ever seen to some dude at the tunnel.

You’re right. Those men should definitely have forced her to get abortions.

Hmm. You’d think at some point between the first and THIRD child your friend should have learned her lesson. But no...it’s just the guy who’s reprehensible, because...you’re trying to get some?

Oh, it doesn’t make me angry at all. It amuses me to see a fool like you tilting at windmills on the internet, fighting hard to make your ignorant points slightly less muddled. And this network of sites, by the way, is a bastion of stupid liberalisms beyond parody - just a bunch of pompous idiots spouting…

God, you suck. Just shut the fuck up. You don’t have to stupidly respond to EVERY comment on your original, stupid post.

Get those “Wine and Canvas” events cranking, man, we’ve got museums to fill!

Kinda like how he dismembered his own face in those self-portraits? Yeah, very exploitative. This chick sucks.

How can you claim that the victim’s (by which I mean: accuser’s) testimony “doesn’t count,” when their testimony is what precipitates the investigation (and sometimes, as in this case, the unequivocal, worldwide, public conviction of the accused) in the first place? Are you seriously suggesting that the testimony of…

She was never investigated to determine if she lied.

“Sulkowicz’s performance...recentered those questions from the abstraction of conversation to the physical realities of the bodies of women.” - no, it didn’t.

SHUT UP!