serial podcast / the walking dead / snl / mindhole blowers / netflix / celebrity facts / marvel

Marvel Loses a Second Director in as Many Days, and a Misogynistic Shooting Inspires an Important Social Movement

By Dustin Rowles | Pajiba Love | May 26, 2014 | Comments ()


There will be light or no posting today, for the holiday, but these links should catch you up on the weekend.

The sad, tragic misogynistically-driven shooting perpetrated by Elliot Rodger that left his two roommates and three young women dead has also inspired the empowering #YesAllWomen hashtag campaign, which is maybe the best thing that’s ever happened on Twitter. Courtney has been an absolute force of nature.

And naturally, some asshole on Fox News sought to turn it around and blame it on Rodger’s “homosexual impulses.” (Gawker)

There was no Game of Thrones this weekend, but that doesn’t mean that Pedro Pascal can’t show you the way to his heart. (Vanity Fair)

In case you just got around to watching the Hannibal season finale, you really have to read Cindy’s breakdown. It’s a masterfully written post-mortem to one of the year’s most anguishing episodes of TV. (Pajiba)

On Friday, you probably heard that Edgar Wright left Ant Man. Drew Goddard followed close behind, leaving Marvel’s Daredevil series. Goddard is leaving to focus on The Sinister Six Spider-Man spin-off, and former Buffy writer Steven S. DeKnight is taking over. (Slashfilm)

Speaking of Edgar Wright’s departure, James Gunn — director of Guardians of the Galaxy — put it all in perspective with a very sweet note. (Collider)

Kanye and Kim Kardashian married this weekend, and Kanye used the opportunity to rage about … something, in his wedding speech. (Dlisted)

I have no idea what this means, but Beyonce and Jay-Z weren’t at that wedding. (LaineyGossip)

Emma Watson wasn’t there, either, but that’s because she was graduating from Brown University. (Celebitchy)

And you’re damn right, Emma Watson is allowed a graduation selfie. (Uproxx)

These Marvel/DC clones reduce the rivalry to something madly adorable. (Unreality)

Sons of Anarchy fans might be interested to know that, in the final season, Jax Teller is nixing the beard. (E!)

Why 'The Best Things in Life Are Free' Was the Perfect Song Upon Which to End This Half Season of 'Mad Men' | 5 Shows After Dark: Nothing Says "High Drama" Like "Incest"

Are you following Pajiba on Facebook or Twitter? Every time you do, Bill Murray crashes a wedding.

Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not

  • HerringGull

    Muggle Studies joke.

  • Being the best thing on Twitter is like winning a gold medal in the Special Olympics. Also, your casualty list is inaccurate: He killed four men and two women.

    In happier news, the guy taking over 'Daredevil' was apparently also the showrunner for 'Spartacus.' Given how much of a hoot that was, it gives me some faith that Daredevil will be worth the time and effort.

  • Maguita NYC

    We might disagree on a few things here and there, for example the first part of your message, but that's okay, BECAUSE SPARTACUS!


    ... Yeah, I don't think Dustin will allow me to post real REAL male frontal nudity on the pajiba. :(

  • Male nudity doesn't really do much for me personally(other than heighten my resolve to go to the gym)but I do think that if you're going to have nudity in a show, you should have parity of nekkedness. It's not going to kill anyone to see a dick on the screen and it gives both sexes an extra reason to watch.

  • Maguita NYC

    ... I read that as "an extra inch to watch..."
    And actually bobbed my head in enthusiastic agreement.

  • LDop

    This story should be corrected to include the following: the shooter stabbed to death three young men (two roommates and their visiting friend), shot and killed two young women outside a sorority, and then shot and killed a young man. All 6 of his victims were UCSB students.

    Initial news reports also indicate most of his other victims were college students, with most being young men. What seems lost here is that, in addition to his misogyny, he also details his hatred of other young men, "brutes" who he views as being undeserving of their success and whom he planned to kill in his disturbing manifesto.

  • lowercase_ryan

    Rodger apologists are approaching Sandy Hook truther levels of horrible and there's so many more of them.

  • foolsage

    I took a look at the Fox comment threads on the topic. Predictably, it's a morass of deflection (e.g. Ban knives, not guns! Ban BMWs, not guns!) and blind partisan hatred (This kid must have been a liberal; see how all liberals always act!), sprinkled with wishful thinking (If only everyone were armed, this could never happen!). It's sickening and saddening, but then I expected as much. I've seen this happen far too many times now.

  • Berry

    Then there are the Youtube comments on his video, celebrating what he did, and the facebook page calling him "a true American hero".

  • foolsage

    Blergh. That's disgusting.

  • Berry

    To say the least.

  • Davis

    What do twitter hashtags actually do? They're day fads, i checked twitter now and the top hashtag is 'Teamniall'. These things would have more power if more people actually cared about the subject rather than looking to get some followers. Though most people on twitter call themselves Cisgender or Demisexual, so i'm probably expecting to much from them.

    But a very tiny consolation price is that Floyd Mayweather got a chair thrown at him over the weekend and he's quite mean to women, so we should thank T.I.

  • _Alexander_

    Raise interest. While it's not really glamorous awareness is important. Well nowhere near as important as doing something real but they are not quite as useless as they look

  • Palandt

    It's odd that the killer talked about hating women and waging war on them but he killed mostly men.

  • foolsage

    His plan was to kill his roommates (which he did) then head to a sorority house and enter to kill all the women inside. They locked the door, thankfully, so he wandered off and found targets of opportunity.

  • stella

    Yay Emma Watson! Hermione would be so proud of you!

  • Al Borland's Beard

    Now Fox just needs to find a way to tie this in with Benghazi.

  • foolsage

    Simple: "Mainstream media outlets are using this story as a pretext not to cover the breaking developments about the tragedy in Benghazi."

  • Maguita NYC

    Richard Martinez's speech broke my heart!


  • pajiba


    Glad you're back. We missed you!

  • Maguita NYC

    Thank you Dustin! And I've missed you too!

    Hope your Pretty in Pink better half and the family are doing well?

  • Berry

    That poor, poor man. And all the other families of the victims.

  • Maguita NYC

    There was an interesting article in the New Yorker regarding his speech and how change always occurs elsewhere following such tragedies. I still wonder how many more is it going to take before we finally adopt the proper corrective measures.

    Also, the news over in France absolutely took me by surprise! I mean, that cook Le Pen is... now powerful!

  • Berry

    It is an interesting article. And good for the writer for reminding us how brave Richard Martinez was to be able to hold it together for long enough to deliver his message.

    I'm not sure if I agree with him about the shooter's misogynistic ideology being peripheral though. He did clearly state that his hatred of women was what made him do it.

  • Maguita NYC

    No matter how open many believe they are, they still steer clear of pointing out misogyny.

    I'm really glad though for Twitter (never thought I'd ever be stating those words):

    #YesAllWomen has opened my eyes on a lot of past, and present, experiences where I too had the first instinct to blame a woman for a man's actions.

    Also, I often took the blame for a guy's reaction. The world is a-changing!

  • Aubenabee

    I think the misogyny at the root of this tragedy is important to look at, but I think ultimately the more action-able thing here is the gun control.

    Regardless of societal levels of misogyny, I think as long as there are men and women, there will be a subset of (most likely young) men who see themselves as constantly rejected by young women and who, as a result, become embittered and hateful. It's terribly sad, and I wish that weren't the case, but I'm not sure it's something we can change.

    I think the thing that we can change, however, is whether or not that bitterness and hate manifests itself through gunfire.

    But that's just my opinion, and I'd be happy to be swayed from it if anyone has better thoughts on the matter.

  • Al Borland's Beard

    The problem with guns is they're so thoroughly ingrained within our culture that it's so difficult to even pass modest gun control laws. People view them as a right, not a privilege. I wish this wasn't the case, but it seems like we've already opened Pandora's box in that regard. I do think we can do more with mental health awareness though. I haven't read a lot on this story, but I know that enough red flags were raised that his family knew he might do something like this, but unfortunately didn't get there early enough to stop him.

  • foolsage

    Serious questions, with no hidden agenda (I promise!):

    * What constitutes a "red flag"?
    * What action should the government take, if an individual has not threatened anyone directly; I.e. how can we proactively prevent violent outbursts?
    * How can we protect the liberty of our citizens while still proactively preventing violent outbursts?

    I don't know the answers to these questions. I hate the violence here, but don't want to live in a police state either. I'm just posing these questions because the subject seems quite complicated to me. I WANT all of these problems to be addressed, sincerely I do... but if the answers aren't obvious to me, I doubt they'll be agreed upon by most Americans at this point.

    Personally, I think it's easier to start with simple and obvious gun control steps. Guns are a catalyst to violence, after all. They encourage people to escalate tense situations. I think many of these shooters wouldn't have acted out violently if not for the sense of power their guns provided to them.

    I'm not ignoring the mental health issue; just trying to find the most pragmatic first steps here.

    Edit to add: I've read more about Elliot Rodger, and it appears that in this case, the shooter did make threats of violence. If someone threatens to kill others, then that person should be placed in police custody to protect the public. My questions above were more pertinent to those cases where no direct threats were made.

  • Al Borland's Beard

    After thinking about it more, I realize that the idea of "red flags" and mental health are difficult to gauge or use for this purpose unless there are actual threats made. One could possibly say that if there is unusual behavior, but that's highly objective and doesn't mean they're prone to violence. You're right that this is much more complicated of an issue than to just say "We should look at mental health." I agree as well on gun control, but I guess my original point wasn't that it shouldn't happen, but that it will be difficult to implement. I suppose that it isn't a valid reason to try though. Thanks for the discussion, you've given me some new things to think about.

  • foolsage

    It's a horribly complicated issue. I really do wish there were easy answers but I haven't yet found any.

    Thanks for the thoughtful posts.

  • Aubenabee

    I think the problem here (and a few people have mentioned this) is that for some reason, in this country, the idea of being able to own a gun is equated with liberty.

    Personally, I think that's crazy. There are plenty of people in the world who can't own (or for whom it is very difficult to own) guns who still have plenty of liberty. And there are plenty of things that I'm not allowed to own (howitzers, rocket launchers, nuclear submarines), but I'm still plenty free.

    People often cite the 2nd amendment when arguing about the association between liberty guns, but we no longer live in the world in which the 2nd amendment written. It was written in a country that had just been through a large war against an oppressive government, and one in which the relationship between the government, the people, and military force was still developing (think Whiskey Rebellion, Shay's Rebellion, etc.). On top of that, at the time, guns were necessary for self-defense and sustenance.

    In that context, in that time, the unrestricted right to bear arms makes sense. In my opinion, today it doesn't.

  • Aubenabee

    You make an excellent point.

    Breaking this tragedy down into three issues (misogyny, gun control, and mental health) rather than two (misogyny and gun control), I think that the ease of addressing the problems goes ...

    (Easiest) Mental health > gun control > misogyny (Hardest).

    I don't think anybody argues against better support for and awareness of mental health issues, and while gun control will have a lot of (vehement) opponents, at least it is something that can theoretically be legislated.

    Like I say below, misogyny will be the hardest of all. In this case, you're not helping people that may acknowledge they need help (like mental health) or taking a way a thing (like guns) but rather changing minds. That can take generations to do, especially because it's often the older misogynists (who don't think their attitudes are harmful or wrong) raising the new generation of misogynists.

  • foolsage

    As difficult as gun control is to pass in America, it's a far simpler subject than mental health. After all, an overwhelming majority of Americans already agree on several basics steps we can and should take to curb gun violence. How do we even begin to address "mental health" though, in such a way that we increase our safety?

    Generally, mental health is raised as a scapegoat for the problem of gun violence. That's not to say that both are not serious issues; they absolutely are. But people who don't really want any gun control often push for mental health reform "first", knowing full well that's not likely to ever happen. It's a shell game.

  • Aubenabee

    All of what you say is true, but allow me to clarify and say that in my original comment, I wasn't suggesting "solving mental health" issues (something that obviously isn't easy or even, really, possible).

  • foolsage

    Fair enough. We agree that we can't "solve" a massive issue simply. As I asked above, how do we even begin to address "mental health" though, in such a way that we increase our safety? You wrote above that you thought that issue was easier to deal with than gun control or misogyny; how do we deal with the issue then? Note that once again I didn't say or suggest that we completely eradicate all mental health issues (which is a strawman); I'm merely asking how we can even begin to make any progress at all on the topic.

    That is to say, what can we do that lessens the risk of violence caused or catalyzed by mental illness? What's a first step? I can think of several, but they all seem to me to do more harm than good. I don't have any good suggestions how to approach this.

  • Aubenabee

    Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I have no idea what to do about it.

  • foolsage

    I'll share one of my bad ideas, because it seems likely that it'll occur to a lot of other people.

    We make lists of people who might be at risk of violent behavior! Those lists would need to include everyone who's suffered from depression (which is a LOT of us), as well as everyone who's had any serious trauma in their life (again, that's a LOT of us), as well as the more obvious schizophrenic or psychopathic or sociopathic individuals.

    This isn't terribly feasible for several reasons though: a) people will under-report their depression/trauma, out of shame or denial, b) the psychopaths and sociopaths will lie, c) the lists wouldn't be up-to-date enough to cover very recent traumas, which often trigger violence; e.g. finding a spouse cheating, and d) this still begs the question of enforcement. Even if we had perfect knowledge about all these groups, what then? How can we be sure that the actions we take to lessen the risk from these groups won't in turn create more trauma and suffering for them, without necessarily reducing overall risk?

    On the simpler side, people who are schizophrenic or psycho/sociopathic can often be more readily identified than other at-risk groups with proper testing, but suffering from any of these diseases or traumas is at most a risk factor, not a guarantee of any sort of future violence. Then, too, how do we identify all these at-risk groups, without some sort of mandatory and regular testing?

    I'm not trying to discourage discussion; I really wish I had these answers. I just don't know what to do about these issues though.

  • Ruthie O

    This is such an awful awful suggestion. I'm sorry, but it really is. There is a reason no one took it seriously when the NRA proposed pretty much the same thing. I'll explain why:

    1. Making lists of possible threats based solely on one factor has never led to anything positive in our country. We've done that a few times, once leading to internment camps.
    2. Making lists of people with history of mental disability would only perpetuate and increase the stigma surrounding mental health. You want people who are suffering to step forward and ask for help? Many won't, knowing that they will end up on a list.
    3. We as a history have valued privacy, hence laws like HIPPA that protect people's medical history from exposure. This is incredibly important because...
    4. Stigma. People are fired for having mental disability. People are shunned for having mental disability. People are abused for having mental disability. People are sterilized for having mental disability. Having any sort of list not protected by HIPPA threatens people with mental disability's privacy, employment, and safety.
    5. The list idea ignores the fact that people with mental disability are FAR MORE likely to be VICTIMS of violence than perpetrators.
    6. The list forces an arbitrary line between "normal" and "abnormal" mental processing, which, you guessed it, increases stigma. We want so badly to label the gunmen (and they usually are men) crazy because that prevents us from having to inspect and analyze ourselves. We distance ourselves from the perpetrators of violence by doing this, but that distancing prevents us from taking a good, long look at our society and ourselves to understand the COMPLEX and INTERCONNECTED roots of mass violence.
    7. By far, most of the perpetrators are mass gun violence in the United States are WHITE MEN. Should we add all white men to the list? Because that is the only known common factor in almost all of these cases, whereas mental disability is only speculation.

    Since you claim to be interested in discussion and answers, educate yourself. Margaret Price's Mad at School has one chapter that deals with the danger of conflating mental disability and violence. Read about the c/s/x movement and the history of institutionalization. You think your idea is new or innovative, but in reality, your insistence that mass violence is related to mental disability has a deep, dark history in the United States, and has led to many a distressing policy and acts of violence against people with mental disabilities.

  • foolsage

    Please carefully re-read my post, where I explicitly point out that it's a bad idea, then I provide several reasons why it's a bad idea. You might even stop to notice that I explicitly stated that I provided that idea precisely because it's a common one, and needed to be debunked. I was in no sense supporting this, and certainly didn't think it was a novel idea. Indeed, I already provided several of the reasons you cited, in the post to which you clearly weren't actually responding above.

    Since you claim to be interested in discussion, please do others the courtesy of reading their words prior to launching a response.

  • Ruthie O

    Hi there. I did read your proposal, and I read the reasons it was a bad idea. None of your reasons related to the reasons I outlined, which relate to the stigma of mental health and mental disability, something that numerous people have pointed out to you in Pajiba comments. Even though you frame it as a bad idea, you still talk about people with mental disabilities as a threat, and I was responding to that.

  • foolsage

    Sigh. The fact that you refer to it as my proposal suggests that you still aren't really understanding what I wrote. It wasn't a proposal; it was a deconstruction of a bad idea. I wasn't proposing this. I said so several times. I'm saying so again, in the hopes that you'll see and understand this time.


    There, it's in all caps!

    Maybe lines such as "How can we be sure that the actions we take to lessen the risk from these groups won't in turn create more trauma and suffering for them, without necessarily reducing overall risk?" weren't clear enough for you? I am quite aware that making lists of people who are at-risk for violence is no sort of solution. I'm also quite aware that making such lists creates more problems than it solves. I could certainly have made that more plain, but then it wasn't completely absent from my post above by any means.

    I absolutely agree that stigma is a serious problem; one of many.

    At no point did I "talk about people with mental disabilities as a threat". You're still responding to something other than what I wrote. Perhaps lines such as "but suffering from any of these diseases or traumas is at most a risk factor, not a guarantee of any sort of future violence" wasn't clear enough for you, once more?

    Depression is a risk factor for violence, as is trauma, as is psychopathy, as is sociopathy, as is schizophrenia. Or are you claiming otherwise? Have some links! Educate yourself!

    Psychopathy is a risk factor for violence.


    Depression's also a risk factor for violence. No, really!


    Schizophrenia is far more complex, but it, too, is a risk factor for violence.



    I could add more links, but if those weren't sufficient, more won't change a damned thing.

    People are more complex than simple lists of qualities though, and I've never claimed otherwise. Being depressed doesn't make you violent. Being a psychopath doesn't make you violent. And so on. However, being AT RISK of violence means that you're more likely to react with violence to stressors than you would otherwise be. It's impossible to have any meaningful discussion of mental health in connection with violence without discussing risk factors. I thought we were trying to have a meaningful discussion of mental health in connection with violence, but I see now that you're more eager to preach to the choir while scolding imaginary faults.

    I don't appreciate having my words ignored, and having views entirely the opposite of what I said and believe attributed to me. Sorry if I'm not being as patient with you as I'd like to be, but you're not really helping there.

    Selah. Take a moment, stop, and re-read what I've written. I don't think our views are significantly different here.

  • Ruthie O

    I'm genuinely sorry. I have re-read your initial post several times, and I still have the same interpretation that I had before. I'll take your word for it that I have misread what you wrote.

  • foolsage

    Fair enough. Take care and have a good day!

  • Maguita NYC

    Don't you find though the blaming of mental health a bit of a cover-up when it comes to gun control?

    I mean, so many suffer from different shades of mental health, and so very-very few resort to gun violence!

  • Aubenabee

    Yeah, you're right. I guess what I'm advocating here is tying mental health awareness to gun control (i.e. "no guns to people with mental health problems"). It seems so obvious to say, but clearly, people with mental health problems are getting guns.

  • Maguita NYC

    Honestly speaking, haven't we all at a time of another suffered of some form of depression, degrees of helplessness that could lead some into instability, to seek professional mental health support, including medication?

    We all go through rough times and some unfortunately snap. But not many turn to the gun and shoot people, no matter their state of mind, or mental health.

    There is no shadow of a doubt in my mind that *owning* a gun puts one already in the frame of potentially resolving confrontation or disappointment with violence, or the threat of violence. Towards yourself, or those you perceive to be the cause.

    But that does not make you automatically medically unstable. Which I see more and more as the number one reason people first revert to whenever there is a gun involved (Michael Jace, etc.) and therefore perpetrate false information, intentionally framing the real situation. Steering the conversation away from the matter at hand.

  • VohaulsRevenge

    1.) Gun rights are a de facto religion in the U.S. You can't use reason against religion, because it's an attack on a person's identity.

    2.) Americans decided a long time ago that ~10,000 gun-related deaths a year (minus suicides) was worth the right to bear arms.

    Time for that cheery "Do the Evolution" music video...

  • Maguita NYC

    Your number 1 has me shaking my head, but completely agreeing with your point.

    And I believe that would call more for the "Do the Evolution" vid to play in reverse!

  • Maguita NYC

    I see your point, and if we have not witnessed lately a sequence of violence against women for simply refusing men, I would have agreed with you. Especially when it comes to gun control.

    It is a touchy subject, this trend of openly making women bow to your needs with the threat of murder. I don't know how to explain it without causing misinterpretation.

    Your answer "...there will be a subset of (most likely young) men who see themselves as constantly rejected by young women and who, as a result, become embittered and hateful..." reminded me of a nation-wide study that came out at the end of last summer, where men and women were asked what they fear most from the opposite sex:

    The top 2 answers from women were the fear of violence and rape from men.

    The top answer from men was the fear of rejection.

    What I am reminded of, is that mothers teach their daughters often enough to be responsible for their behavior, including the way they dress, sit, talk, walk, so not to incur men's "unwanted attentions".

    Isn't it time to expect the same from men: For fathers (and mothers) to teach their sons responsibility for their actions and stop blaming women for life's challenges, even when it comes to disappointments when dealing with the opposite sex?

    The killer in this situation was part of the Men's Blogosphere, were they are encouraged to perceive women as evil manipulative bitches who use sex to get their way: The level of hatred at times is mind-boggling for it often digresses into threats of rape, violence and death. Shouldn't all men look into the growing hatred towards women and speak up not only against it, but also for the collective responsibility of raising boys into men equally respecting women?

    And no, just to make it clear: I'm not accusing ALL MEN of RAISING ALL BOYS into being murderers; I'm simply stating that we are collectively responsible for still encouraging the placing of blame for a man's misbehavior on women.

    As for gun laws, if the hacking of young children with a semi-automatic did not wake the nation up to the lack of gun control, and at the very least questioning why are we selling semi-automatics to the general population no matter its supposed state of mind, I honestly do not know what will... And it makes me sad and hopeless for the future at times.

  • Aubenabee

    You make a lot of fantastic points. That survey you mention is all sorts of interesting/depressing, and I could not agree more with what you were saying with regard to the need to make changes to the way boys are raised.

    I think my emphasis on the gun control narrative rather than the misogyny issue derives from practical considerations. We can use empowering hashtags and encourage people to raise their sons better until we're blue in the face, but it takes generations for those attitudes to filter out of the population (and, truth be told, they never will disappear completely).

    Developing and enforcing much more stringent gun control won't be easy by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think it will be easier and faster to some degree.

  • Maguita NYC

    ... Which came first in America: The Second Amendment or Equal Rights for women?

    Gun rights are so ingrained into US culture, it is surprising at how many consider it as innate right. You were born with the right to hold a gun, and will only lose that right from your "Cold Dead Hands".

    I used to also think that restrictive gun laws would be so easy to implement, but apparently not even the killing of children would motivate such action. But oh how much I agree with your POV. As for misogyny, the wind of change is here, so take advantage and teach: Men should not rape, men should not kill.

  • Berry

    hashtag, CourtneyEnlowIsAmazing. (Others too, of course.)

  • Maguita NYC

    The woman is just fabulously fierce.

  • Berry

    Yep, and she's not even the worst. There's the German NDP, as well as xenophobes and far-right extremists from Greece, Denmark, Britain, Sweden, Finland...

  • _Alexander_

    To be fair. While some of are neo nazi assholes quite a few of those who we would describe as fascist and far right extremists in Europe are what would be considered an average Republican in the USA. So while horrible it's not quite as bad as it looks

  • Berry

    Still, I'm not convinced I'd want an average Republican decide things for me either.

  • foolsage

    Another way of saying that is, "Things in America are worse than they look." :D

  • _Alexander_

    Well well well....it's not exactly that. It's more like you guys have learned to live with this tumor and are kind coping with it while for others it can be a stressful experience

  • foolsage

    It might appear from the outside that we're coping, but the oncologists here find this national tumor very stressful indeed.

  • Maguita NYC

    All this I'm afraid will conglomerate and explode into a colossal shitstorm... I keep reminding myself that shitstorms are what often cause change for the better. Here's hoping...

  • Buck up. Remember the Tea Party, and take a look at how the Teeper candidates fared across the country in the recent GOP primaries.

  • Maguita NYC

    My first reaction was to remind you of the Tea's party damage done to the country what with the backward thinking, relegating women to second class citizenship, and the damage they are still causing in the name of Free Speech...

    But hey, let's hope the primaries are a promise for a brighter future away from far-right hate speech and false indoctrination.

    Going back to the glass being half empty: Some are saying the Tea Party was able to pick better representatives who look less crazy on the outside, this time around, but however the hidden agenda is still as far-right wingnuttery as ever. Only the people would be mislead into electing what seem to be more centrist conservatives...

  • Berry

    It is my hope that once these people have to actually govern, they lose some of their teeth, and thus some of their supporters. Not all of them want to govern, though. Some of them just want to watch the world burn.

    Not Le Pen's FN though. They do want real power, and they could get it, and hold it. Maybe depending on how this Euro-crises continues to shape up.

    And when you have both far right and far left cooks doing well in Greece, you worry. Communists and Nazis, together again. I would have drank so much last night if it had been a holiday weekend here too.

  • foolsage

    The 113th Congress is objectively the worst ever. They've shown themselves incapable of or disinterested in even discussing most of the pressing issues that face our country. They're already there, and they do not choose to govern. Many of them think, as Reagan did, that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem".

    To my mind, that attitude should be enough to prevent one from serving in our government. If you don't believe in the government, then why are you working for it? Get the hell out of the way and let others do the job.

    Anyhow, that was a tangent.

  • Berry

    Everything is shit today (in addition to the shooting, the highlights include, but are not limited to: the attack at the Jewish museum in Brussels, and the fact that actual, bona-fide Neo-Nazis now have seats in the European parliament), but at least Emma Watson is still adorable. Small mercies, and all that.

  • Maguita NYC

    OMG LOOK! Puppies...

  • It's nice to see you back.

  • Maguita NYC

    Thank you Q!

  • chanohack


  • Maguita NYC

    Chanohack! *hugs screen*

    I've missed you!

  • chanohack

    EEEEE furry friends for everyone! I've missed you too! <3

  • Jim

    Junior child protectors share a hug. (I think I'm gonna stand here a while.)


  • Maguita NYC

    Breathtaking gorgeousness hugs a cutie.

  • Jim

    Oh, I didn't realize the phrase "Lucky Dog" was so contemporary.

  • Maguita NYC

    One of these days I'mma gonna call myself a lucky bitch. (I feel Mrs. J giving me the stinkeye)

  • Al Borland's Beard

    Here's a baby duck sitting on a dog's head.


  • Maguita NYC

    OMG, look at the cute duck sitting on that old fart's head!

    ETA: (Damn you Disqus!!! making me believe my pic did not go up the first time. *shakes fist at screen*)

  • foolsage

    Disqus won't show you whether a picture was successfully directly attached to a post until you refresh. At that point, Disqus won't let you edit or remove pictures that you attached directly to the post, nor can you actually delete posts. It's quite annoying.

  • Maguita NYC


  • foolsage

    Exactly! This whole Disqus thing is just meant to distract us from Benghazi.

  • Maguita NYC

    And here I thought abortion was the root of all Disqus evil... or you know, as they call it "Protecting women's bodies and health".

  • Al Borland's Beard

    It did the same thing to me.

  • Guest


  • MeganLinefyl321

    upto I saw the draft of $7025 , I be certain
    ...that...my mom in-law woz like they say truley making money part-time on
    their apple labtop. . there sisters roommate had bean doing this less than 8
    months and at present repayed the debts on their house and bought a brand new
    volvo . look at here now M­o­n­e­y­d­u­t­i­e­s­.­C­O­M­

  • AvaLehra

    Fancy meeting you here! xo

  • Maguita NYC

    How you doin' chica? All is well with the things and the cute family?

  • Linda Lupos

    There was an attack at a synagogue in Paris, too...

  • Berry

    Really? I hadn't yet heard of that. This is insane. What the fuck, people?

  • You left out the shooting in Myrtle Beach, SC, and that apocalyptic mudslide in Colorado. As if all this wasn't enough, it is raining like a bitch here.
    Sheesh, some holiday weekend.

  • Berry

    I'm also sad about Helena on Orphan Black, but it felt wrong to mention that with the real life stuff...

blog comments powered by Disqus