I am not on board with the idea that professional film reviewers can only review films made by directors who identity match them. Ava DuVernay is a director. She’s not a fragile flower. If she wants to do big-budget movies for a general-interest audience, she needs to beable to handle critiques by white men and white…

This sentence “That woman created the concept of inclusion riders and is giving this example.” is exactly what I said with different wording. Does your rewording have a point?

I had a bad feeling about this movie when I read an interview with Ava DuVernay, where she said she’d never read the book before being offered the movie and came across as not having much interest in L’Engle’s work. It seems to me that when adapting a book that was deeply meaningful to its fans that you would want a…

But it’s a chicken and the egg problem. The history of the country includes systemic, formal discrimination, which means the overwhelming majority of people in position to build relationships are white men who overwhelmingly build relationships with other white men. Something needs to break that cycle.

The article that you’re pulling those numbers from gave them as an example. It didn’t mean that all inclusion riders—or necessarily any inclusion riders—would use those specific numbers.

She’s not obviously anything. She could be gay, straight, bi, asexual, pan.
“Let It Go” obviously resonates as a coming out anthem for many people, but that’s not its actual role in the film and that’s not the only experience it speaks to.

No worries. It’s not an aspect of her identity that Pink emphasized for most of her career, but she’s been more vocal since we entered our current political nightmare.

She is not a WASP. She’s Jewish. And since there have been some pretty embarrassing Jews in the news lately, I’m excited to get to claim a non-embarrassing Jewish celeb.

Which was all I wanted from her return in the Mirror Verse because I was hella pissed that she died in the main verse due to a fight with a Klingon warrior, but there was not actually a good fight scene.

I was familiar with every part of that story except the Where Are They Now part. I really believe in the police as an institution, but I am really wondering if we need to dismantle all of our current police departments and start all over. Their fellow officers voted them Officers of the Year. I just... I have no tools…

In other words, you have no ability to actually answer my questions because if you have to actually look at what Grace said/did versus what she thought, you’ll have to acknowledge that she gave consent. 

Why are you so afraid to acknowledge Grace’s actions, agency, and role in what happened? Why do you need to deflect so desperately? Why is it so terrifying for you to admit that Grace had multiple opportunities to clearly communicate with Ansari and that she made active actions that appeared to be giving consent?

Aziz Ansari: “ and afterwards we ended up engaging in sexual activity, which by all indications was completely consensual.”

Wow, such a sterling rebuttal. So convincing.

How exactly was she planning on communicating that she wasn’t interested in anything more than kissing if she had no plans to actually communicate it? No one thinks kissing is consent for anything goes. But YES, if you go up to someone’s private space after a date, it is very likely sexual contact will be initiated.…

Yes, this is what so many people are ignoring. And per Grace’s own description, we’re told that he wasn’t even touching her for the second blowjob. She felt pressured internally, but from his POV, she hadn’t made any move to get dressed or leave; he’s not even touching her; he’s slowed down when she’s indicated she…

You’re never going to get a coherent answer that actually acknowledged Grace’s agency in what happened. Because there isn’t a coherent answer. The pressure she felt was entirely internal. Ansari wasn’t even really that pushy when you take out the parts of the account that describe Grace’s internal state.

I really do…

There is no way you could actually have read what I wrote and think that I “accept that she gave clear non-verbal signals.” Try actually reading before replying next time.

I think what changed is that the Aziz Ansari case was such a gray area in the way it was framed that it made some people more willing to vocalize their doubts, which in turn made even more people willing. But there’s been a degree of pushback and questioning since Al Franken (for example, this Daphne Merkin article in…

It is incredibly unclear to me that she did not give consent. She’s pretty scathing in her version of events, but she doesn’t indicate implied or explicit force. She sounds like she was participating fully at the beginning (and maybe even eagerly? it’s really unclear exactly what happened during the 10 minutes of…