UGH how is it possible that Kesha will be in Chicago on my due date?! NO! I need to be at this concert. Not even born yet and already wreaking havock on my social life!

10/10 definitely would see

You’re too dense to understand what he’s doing. He is doing something that you, for all your sanctimonious self righteousness, are incapable of doing: having some empathy with what that person’s thought process and communicating in a manner that he will understand.

Don’t forget about John Oliver, he is been on a roll lately.

I don’t think they have an entire writer’s room working on one social media account.

He is emphatically unfunny and while I also doubt he wrote this tweet it’s in line with his particular brand of bad comedy.

There is nothing to like. His stand up is awful.

Even though Trevor Noah probably didn’t have anything to do with the tweet, this post still reminds me of how downhill the show has gone since John Stewart left. It’s cringe inducing.

“Our National tournament deserves better than Fox.”

You are still missing the point! The headline is 100% accurate. It is not clickbait or misleading. If you thought the headline “Interview With a Woman Who Recently Had an Abortion at 32 Weeks” was intended to vilify (on Jezebel no less), that is because you have some hangups with late-term abortion, and a reflexive…

Except that your assumption that the headline was vilifying her — your immediate, gut reaction assumption that the late-term abortion was a bad abortion — WAS judgement on her. You immediately assumed it was vilifying her, because you immediately vilified her before you read it.

Your interpretation of the headline is on you.

But, why would having a late term abortion “villify” anyone?

I hope you see the problem with your view that stating the bare fact of a woman having an abortion at 32 weeks seems like “vilifying” her to you. Anti-abortion rhetoric is internalized by many of us (Elizabeth included, per her own word). I’ll take you at your word that you are 100% pro choice, but I think your…

I think the question, then, is why you would think an article on Jezebel—on Jezebel!—would in any way, ever vilify a woman who had any kind of abortion?

“I’m totally pro choice, except for in my earlier comments when I make it plainly known that I would be HORRIFIED if a woman chose to have a late term abortion for a reason I did not agree with” — you

I agree. I read the article because I saw the headline and one of my closest girlfriends had an abortion on the last day of her second trimester when I was sixteen. It was legal back then in NY.

What about the headline made you think that, though. It’s pretty much a dispassionate representation of exactly what the story covers. It’s not sensational or controversial or click bait. The headline is an exact descriptor of the article, without any kind of attached emotion or judgement. You are the one that added…

There is no way that factually correct headline could be misinterpreted as disrespectful to this woman. She had an abortion at 32 weeks. The article explains what it was like and why she had it. Period. It seems like you want the headline to explain why the woman is not a bad person for having the abortion so late, to…

I am not sure why you thought the title was disrespectful of or vilifying the woman being interviewed. If the headline had been “Interview With A Woman Who Recently Had Heart Bypass Surgery At Age 35" would you immediately assume the article/author/publisher was vilifying her for eating an unhealthy diet and not…