Cheez-It's Appreciation Thread.

General discussion, shows, and everything else.

Postby osully55 » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:14 pm

PaulKersey wrote:Then figuratively, it is also a shitty analogy. Blacklisted writers and actors were targeted for their political views. How is that in any way analogous to men being creepy, abusive scumbags?


it's more like an overzealous public that can't differentiate between the rosenbergs, and some guy reading a pamphlet on workers rights, but is fine with ruining both.
User avatar
osully55
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 1:57 pm

Postby PaulKersey » Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:15 pm

Then what would you like to address? The fact that the severity of each individual case varies? OK, it does. Now what?

The refrain from people calling into question the accusers is "Oh, well he isnt Weinstein" , as if being a rapist who enlists the help of Mossad agents to silence his victims is the only way a man can be a predator. Aziz's actions, although technically not illegal, are scummy and simply not OK.

You brought up the shift in public opinion and how #MeToo will suffer if the public at large "turns on them" which I take to mean, if they thinks it is overreaching(??) So far, they havent overreached. Each of the accused has been worth exposing, and has led to bigger conversations around the topic of consent. Men largely have had their heads in the sand on the issue (I've had my share of head-spinning convos about it in the last week alone, both online and off) and continue to nit-pick Grace from the Babe story, and if it isnt a man, it's an out-of-touch "feminist" like Caitlin Flanagan.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby judge smails » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:06 pm

PaulKersey wrote:Then figuratively, it is also a shitty analogy. Blacklisted writers and actors were targeted for their political views. How is that in any way analogous to men being creepy, abusive scumbags?

It’s analogous because like with McCarthyism guilt is irrelevant. Once the accusation is cast court of public opinion automatically assumes guilt on the part of the male.
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby Heathenist » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:13 pm

judge smails wrote:
PaulKersey wrote:Then figuratively, it is also a shitty analogy. Blacklisted writers and actors were targeted for their political views. How is that in any way analogous to men being creepy, abusive scumbags?

It’s analogous because like with McCarthyism guilt is irrelevant. Once the accusation is cast court of public opinion automatically assumes guilt on the part of the male.

Sure, but guilt of having political opinions and guilt of sexually abusing women are very different. I think you guys really need to consider that there are varying degrees here. You really need to make distinctions between the offenses or no one is going to take that comparison seriously.
User avatar
Heathenist
 
Posts: 20318
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:22 am

Postby judge smails » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:22 pm

Do you guys know what analogous means?
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby oldorder » Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:25 pm

Heathenist wrote:
judge smails wrote:
PaulKersey wrote:Then figuratively, it is also a shitty analogy. Blacklisted writers and actors were targeted for their political views. How is that in any way analogous to men being creepy, abusive scumbags?

It’s analogous because like with McCarthyism guilt is irrelevant. Once the accusation is cast court of public opinion automatically assumes guilt on the part of the male.

Sure, but guilt of having political opinions and guilt of sexually abusing women are very different. I think you guys really need to consider that there are varying degrees here. You really need to make distinctions between the offenses or no one is going to take that comparison seriously.

It's hard to take this post seriously since it really says nothing while at the same time missing the point it's trying to address entirely.
oldorder
would rather die than not eat Taco Bell
 
Posts: 14163
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:23 pm
Location: On my ALCATEL 4015T

Postby Sorley Boy » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:43 pm

Heathenist wrote:
judge smails wrote:
PaulKersey wrote:Then figuratively, it is also a shitty analogy. Blacklisted writers and actors were targeted for their political views. How is that in any way analogous to men being creepy, abusive scumbags?

It’s analogous because like with McCarthyism guilt is irrelevant. Once the accusation is cast court of public opinion automatically assumes guilt on the part of the male.

Sure, but guilt of having political opinions and guilt of sexually abusing women are very different. I think you guys really need to consider that there are varying degrees here. You really need to make distinctions between the offenses or no one is going to take that comparison seriously.


I would say the opposite is true. Inserting Aziz Ansari into a conversation about rapists like Harvey Weinstein glosses over the differences and degrees of guilt and implies they're comparable. My problem, which seems to be the problem a lot of people have, is that those differences are being ignored and Ansari is being publicly humiliated and attacked on the basis of a one-sided narrative involving an inherently gray area. And that conversation is important to have, but it's not fair to have it about a specific person whose motivations and understanding of the situation are up for debate among reasonable people, and who can't really defend himself as a practical matter.
User avatar
Sorley Boy
 
Posts: 9321
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:01 pm

Postby Booty Telegram » Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:38 pm

judge smails wrote:Do you guys know what analogous means?

Yeah, it really doesn't seem like it. It's like they think if someone is comparing certain aspects of two things, they're automatically comparing the two things in every aspect.

This whole lynch mob mentality that ignores basic tenets and principles of law in the name of supposed justice they know shit about is also really concerning and hypocritical.
User avatar
Booty Telegram
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:05 am
Location: Europe

Postby PaulKersey » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:43 am

Basic tenets and principles of law? What are you even saying? Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.

And quite frankly Sorley, I am shedding no tears over Aziz's current situation. You talk about gray areas and one-sided narratives as if Aziz is sputtering "b-b-b-b-but it isnt true!". He knows he fucked up, as do all the others. It is not a gray area. She said no, he continued. She pushed his hand away and told him "next time", he kept going. No one is glossing over the differences between Weinstein and Aziz. You'd be insane to do so, but that doesnt excuse Aziz's shitty actions.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby PaulKersey » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:48 am

Also boo fucking hoo to the word "lynch mob" getting thrown around whenever a famous actor gets his dick dragged through the dirt for doing scummy shit. You know what will happen? This will cool off eventually and Aziz will go right back to work and i wouldnt even DENY him or anyone who employs him for it. Same with Louie. He'll bounce back. It's not as if I think they should lose everything forever and be barred from the industry, but the shit is not being addressed properly by everyone, and thats really more of a reflection on the Joe Schmoe public who could learn a thing or two from these incidents.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby blackhawks#1 » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:22 am

PaulKersey wrote:Also boo fucking hoo to the word "lynch mob" getting thrown around whenever a famous actor gets his dick dragged through the dirt for doing scummy shit. but the shit is not being addressed properly by everyone, and thats really more of a reflection on the Joe Schmoe public who could learn a thing or two from these incidents.

I agree with you
User avatar
blackhawks#1
HELL YES
 
Posts: 41267
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:39 am
Location: chicago

Postby judge smails » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:15 pm

PaulKersey wrote:Basic tenets and principles of law? What are you even saying? Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.

And quite frankly Sorley, I am shedding no tears over Aziz's current situation. You talk about gray areas and one-sided narratives as if Aziz is sputtering "b-b-b-b-but it isnt true!". He knows he fucked up, as do all the others. It is not a gray area. She said no, he continued. She pushed his hand away and told him "next time", he kept going. No one is glossing over the differences between Weinstein and Aziz. You'd be insane to do so, but that doesnt excuse Aziz's shitty actions.

Nice straw man. No one is saying that Aziz (or any celebrity that’s been accused of misconduct) acted appropriately.
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby equally stupid » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:30 pm

PaulKersey wrote:Basic tenets and principles of law? What are you even saying? Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.

And quite frankly Sorley, I am shedding no tears over Aziz's current situation. You talk about gray areas and one-sided narratives as if Aziz is sputtering "b-b-b-b-but it isnt true!". He knows he fucked up, as do all the others. It is not a gray area. She said no, he continued. She pushed his hand away and told him "next time", he kept going. No one is glossing over the differences between Weinstein and Aziz. You'd be insane to do so, but that doesnt excuse Aziz's shitty actions.


Ansari maintains that it was consensual.
equally stupid
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:00 pm

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:05 am

judge smails wrote:
PaulKersey wrote:Basic tenets and principles of law? What are you even saying? Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.

And quite frankly Sorley, I am shedding no tears over Aziz's current situation. You talk about gray areas and one-sided narratives as if Aziz is sputtering "b-b-b-b-but it isnt true!". He knows he fucked up, as do all the others. It is not a gray area. She said no, he continued. She pushed his hand away and told him "next time", he kept going. No one is glossing over the differences between Weinstein and Aziz. You'd be insane to do so, but that doesnt excuse Aziz's shitty actions.

Nice straw man. No one is saying that Aziz (or any celebrity that’s been accused of misconduct) acted appropriately.


What exactly is the straw man here? You havent said anything of substance that indicates to me that these stories are sinking in with you, only focusing on how Aziz is affected, which mind you, is something he needs to deal with for acting like a scumbag.

You said assumed guilt and mentioned the "court of public opinion" as if they are being unfairly attacked. He knows he fucked up. Louie knows he fucked up. They are not denying any charges; theyve instead offered up half-assed "apologies".
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:19 am

Even the Cos can bounce back! Cheer up guys, you can go back to binge-watching Parks & Rec on Netflix soon enough.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/arts/television/bill-cosby-performs-philadelphia.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby rowdiedondown » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:33 am

One show in front of 50 is hardly a bounce back. And though you're being flippant, Tony Williams, man fuck that.
User avatar
rowdiedondown
 
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:49 am
Location: I'm just chillin in cedar rapids

Postby judge smails » Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:43 am

PaulKersey wrote:
judge smails wrote:
PaulKersey wrote:Basic tenets and principles of law? What are you even saying? Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.

And quite frankly Sorley, I am shedding no tears over Aziz's current situation. You talk about gray areas and one-sided narratives as if Aziz is sputtering "b-b-b-b-but it isnt true!". He knows he fucked up, as do all the others. It is not a gray area. She said no, he continued. She pushed his hand away and told him "next time", he kept going. No one is glossing over the differences between Weinstein and Aziz. You'd be insane to do so, but that doesnt excuse Aziz's shitty actions.

Nice straw man. No one is saying that Aziz (or any celebrity that’s been accused of misconduct) acted appropriately.


What exactly is the straw man here? You havent said anything of substance that indicates to me that these stories are sinking in with you, only focusing on how Aziz is affected, which mind you, is something he needs to deal with for acting like a scumbag.

You said assumed guilt and mentioned the "court of public opinion" as if they are being unfairly attacked. He knows he fucked up. Louie knows he fucked up. They are not denying any charges; theyve instead offered up half-assed "apologies".

“Just because something isnt illegal, then it automatically must be OK.” That’s the straw man. No one is making that claim. Just because what Aziz is accused of doing isn’t illegal doesn’t make it morally acceptable. As far as my point about the court of public opinion, the accusations made against these men are serious. You’re right that both Aziz and Louis will likely both bounce back. That’s not my concern. My concern is the potential for abuse. That there is opportunity here for the unscrupulous to destroy an innocent person’s life while advancing their own career. It’s naive to think that it’s not a possible outcome in the current climate. That’s the parallel to McCarthyism.
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:14 am

OK, so when that hypothetical scenario pops its head into reality, then we'll have that conversation. You have said nothing.

Your concern is for abuse, as if what? Women will make up their rapes/assaults and other allegations of harassment and abuse? False allegations of sexual assault hover somewhere between 2-10%. The only false allegations that I can recall in recent memory that involved famous men were Kobe Bryant and Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Kobe was able to bounce back (marital discord notwithstanding, he DID cheat on his wife after all), and Strauss-Kahn was ruined. Dude probably would have become president of France. So weep for him if you must (although that would require ignoring his proclivity for prostitutes, OOPS).

Until then, these men need to stop being shitheads. It's not some miracle cure, it's a behavior that has been perpetuated for centuries and has not abated. Call. this. shit. out.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:16 am

rowdiedondown wrote:One show in front of 50 is hardly a bounce back. And though you're being flippant, Tony Williams, man fuck that.


Image
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby rowdiedondown » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:23 am

Yea....I got that eg flippant etc.
User avatar
rowdiedondown
 
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:49 am
Location: I'm just chillin in cedar rapids

Postby judge smails » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:06 pm

PaulKersey wrote:OK, so when that hypothetical scenario pops its head into reality, then we'll have that conversation. You have said nothing.

Your concern is for abuse, as if what? Women will make up their rapes/assaults and other allegations of harassment and abuse? False allegations of sexual assault hover somewhere between 2-10%. The only false allegations that I can recall in recent memory that involved famous men were Kobe Bryant and Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Kobe was able to bounce back (marital discord notwithstanding, he DID cheat on his wife after all), and Strauss-Kahn was ruined. Dude probably would have become president of France. So weep for him if you must (although that would require ignoring his proclivity for prostitutes, OOPS).

Until then, these men need to stop being shitheads. It's not some miracle cure, it's a behavior that has been perpetuated for centuries and has not abated. Call. this. shit. out.

So guilty until proven innocent. Got it.
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby Booty Telegram » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:19 pm

PaulKersey wrote:OK, so when that hypothetical scenario pops its head into reality, then we'll have that conversation. You have said nothing.

Your concern is for abuse, as if what? Women will make up their rapes/assaults and other allegations of harassment and abuse? False allegations of sexual assault hover somewhere between 2-10%. The only false allegations that I can recall in recent memory that involved famous men were Kobe Bryant and Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Kobe was able to bounce back (marital discord notwithstanding, he DID cheat on his wife after all), and Strauss-Kahn was ruined. Dude probably would have become president of France. So weep for him if you must (although that would require ignoring his proclivity for prostitutes, OOPS).

Until then, these men need to stop being shitheads. It's not some miracle cure, it's a behavior that has been perpetuated for centuries and has not abated. Call. this. shit. out.

Until when? You need people's lives to actually be destroyed before you realize this could be and already has been a problem? Didn't you mention Strauss-Kahn's life already has been? How many more innocent people need to be sacrificed? (Also, what do prostitutes have to do with anything? For you, that's enough justification for him to get accused of rape?)

You've never heard of the presumption of innocence? Or that it's better that ten/hundred/thousand guilty people are set free than that one innocent suffers? These are all established principles of law (literally everywhere) that are violated with media trials like that. I honestly don't get how you just don't care about the possibility of innocent people's lives getting destroyed. I mean, all the victims have the same protections, regardless of whether there is also a media conviction. No one is saying anything about taking those away. But you're just making this false dichotomy where apparently they retain their rights only if someone's life is put at the risk of destruction, and that that's also the only way we can have a debate about such sexual behavior. Absolutely no one is defending the latter anyway. And also, absolutely no one is saying we shouldn't be having these debates.
User avatar
Booty Telegram
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:05 am
Location: Europe

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:32 pm

You two are absolutely unbearable. Follow along with me now: NONE OF THE MEN ACCUSED IN RECENT MONTHS HAVE DENIED ANYTHING. In fact they have all admitted guilt, and apologized, albeit poorly and half-heartedly. You can bringing up legal standards and "media trials" but you trying to take the ball and run with my two examples, as if it applies to the rest of the accused in recent months, is absurd.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby Booty Telegram » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:42 pm

PaulKersey wrote:You two are absolutely unbearable. Follow along with me now: NONE OF THE MEN ACCUSED IN RECENT MONTHS HAVE DENIED ANYTHING. In fact they have all admitted guilt, and apologized, albeit poorly and half-heartedly. You can bringing up legal standards and "media trials" but you trying to take the ball and run with my two examples, as if it applies to the rest of the accused in recent months, is absurd.

What are you talking about? Aziz said he believes it was consensual.

And the whole point of the presumption of innocence is to wait until the trial is over, so that last part you wrote is just case in point for what we've been saying.
User avatar
Booty Telegram
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:05 am
Location: Europe

Postby PaulKersey » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:48 pm

Aziz apologized to her after the incident once she confronted him about it on the ride home.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby Booty Telegram » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:52 pm

PaulKersey wrote:Aziz apologized to her after the incident once she confronted him about it on the ride home.

Yeah, he did, but he didn't admit guilt and instead denied allegations that it wasn't consensual. An apology isn't an admission of guilt, especially not in these circumstances.
User avatar
Booty Telegram
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:05 am
Location: Europe

Postby Heathenist » Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:54 pm

The problem is that people often use that argument in order to delegitimize the claims made by women. And many of the people pushing that argument seem more concerned with protecting hypothetical men who have been falsely accused than they do about the thousands of actual women who have actually been abused.
User avatar
Heathenist
 
Posts: 20318
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:22 am

Postby Booty Telegram » Tue Jan 23, 2018 5:22 pm

Heathenist wrote:The problem is that people often use that argument in order to delegitimize the claims made by women. And many of the people pushing that argument seem more concerned with protecting hypothetical men who have been falsely accused than they do about the thousands of actual women who have actually been abused.

I don't know, me personally, I use the argument neither to legitimize or delegitimize those claims. I'm only advocating for the due process of law and that absolutely nothing is lost by waiting for a decision to be made. You can still drag all those people through the mud later when there's a much smaller chance of that being unjustified.

As for the last part, that might be the case with some people, but definitely not with everyone. The reason that this in particular is debated so much is because the victims are already afforded the support they need and they will also be able to prosecute the accused regardless of whether it makes it into the media or not. So when it does, people in general already agree that no recourse should be taken away from the victims and that's taken as granted in the debate. The only thing that remains contentious is whether you're gonna afford protection to the potentially innocent or not. That's really the only thing that's interesting from a legal perspective, everything else is settled already. I definitely didn't see a single person in this thread saying these women shouldn't be allowed to (help) start criminal proceedings, for example.
User avatar
Booty Telegram
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:05 am
Location: Europe

Postby alchemist » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:11 pm

Hey this got changed to the Cheez-It appreciation thread so I came to pay my respects.
User avatar
alchemist
 
Posts: 7490
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:57 am
Location: ROLL TIDE

Postby taylorm » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:12 pm

alchemist wrote:Hey this got changed to the Cheez-It appreciation thread so I came to pay my respects.

Image
User avatar
taylorm
loves farts
 
Posts: 22087
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 5:01 am
Location: Board

Postby andydansby » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:19 pm

Just wanna add something before the thread gets completely off topic

Spoiler: show
I had some of the cheez it grooves the other day and they sucked asssssssssss. So disappointing.
Last edited by andydansby on Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
andydansby
RIP Brittany Murphy
 
Posts: 14467
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:22 am
Location: B9board.com

Postby judge smails » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:20 pm

PaulKersey wrote:You two are absolutely unbearable. Follow along with me now: NONE OF THE MEN ACCUSED IN RECENT MONTHS HAVE DENIED ANYTHING. In fact they have all admitted guilt, and apologized, albeit poorly and half-heartedly. You can bringing up legal standards and "media trials" but you trying to take the ball and run with my two examples, as if it applies to the rest of the accused in recent months, is absurd.

If the me too movement sparks a cultural shift towards respect and consent and making sure everyone involved in sexual encounters feels safe and comfortable, fantastic. The only thing I’m trying to say is let’s be smart about how we approach that goal.
User avatar
judge smails
 
Posts: 8922
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:17 am
Location: The Flying Wasp

Postby gravity » Tue Jan 23, 2018 6:31 pm

Saw this the other day and it immediately got my attention.

Spoiler: show
Image
gravity
 
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:20 am
Location: NJ

Postby taylorm » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:41 pm

gravity wrote:Saw this the other day and it immediately got my attention.

Spoiler: show
Image

:smt007
User avatar
taylorm
loves farts
 
Posts: 22087
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 5:01 am
Location: Board

Postby radiatedradiation » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:54 am

I made a mac n cheese a couple weeks ago and used crushed up cheez its as the breadcrumbs on top
User avatar
radiatedradiation
 
Posts: 8695
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:26 pm
Location: FL

Postby gravity » Thu Jan 25, 2018 8:17 am

radiatedradiation wrote:I made a mac n cheese a couple weeks ago and used crushed up cheez its as the breadcrumbs on top


Spoiler: show
Image
gravity
 
Posts: 1562
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:20 am
Location: NJ

Postby blackhawks#1 » Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:03 pm

User avatar
blackhawks#1
HELL YES
 
Posts: 41267
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:39 am
Location: chicago

Postby blackapache » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/2 ... a-feminism

Real good piece on why we shouldn't exclusively bank on the threat of punishment to sort this shit out.

Spoiler: show
We must be precise in our designation of what is at the root of this scourge: power. Sexual harassment and assault are pervasive in our society because extravagant wealth and absolute poverty are pervasive. No, the most equal society on Earth would not be entirely free of interpersonal violence; it would, however, provide far less structural power for perpetrators to hold over their victims. To reduce this violence, we must reduce inequality.

That means redistributing wealth so no one can attain the immunity Weinstein enjoyed for decades. It means expanding the social safety net so survivors don’t need to remain with abusers. It means delinking health care from employment status so that one’s health doesn’t depend on remaining in an abusive workplace. It means the provision of citizenship to the undocumented so that supervisors can’t threaten the most vulnerable among us with deportation to ensure their acquiescence. And it means strengthening unions, so working people have recourse against retaliation for speaking up.
User avatar
blackapache
 
Posts: 7668
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:00 am
Location: Richmond, Va

Postby lala fuck you » Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:28 pm

chris hardwick don goof
User avatar
lala fuck you
 
Posts: 27752
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:44 am
Location: PR

Postby SchlongConnery » Fri Jun 15, 2018 5:22 pm

lala fuck you wrote:chris hardwick don goof


Well, at least he's still got that Hearst money. Until she leaves him.
User avatar
SchlongConnery
 
Posts: 1852
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 5:20 pm
Location: L.A. Gear

Postby IThinkItsIndecision » Fri Jun 15, 2018 5:54 pm

"When do you think I can have sex with her again?” seems like something you should never say out loud.
User avatar
IThinkItsIndecision
Is that a football in your pocket?
 
Posts: 27981
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 5:15 pm
Location: Boondoggling

Postby PaulKersey » Fri Jun 15, 2018 6:00 pm

I'm shocked this thread got bumped considering a dickhead felt the need to change the title so it became completely unrecognizable as a Me Too thread.

Already seeing people say "She sounds crazy" and "I love when the left eats their own". Motherfucker, what? 95% of the industry is liberal, yes. Abusive assholes abound in all industries. Entertainment is one of them. Therefore, theres a strong likelihood that some "Hollywood liberal" is an abusive asshole. People are dumb.
PaulKersey
 
Posts: 8542
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: The Bronx

Postby wegotdome » Fri Jun 15, 2018 7:58 pm

Legit clicked on this thinking it was about cheez its
User avatar
wegotdome
 
Posts: 2700
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:12 pm
Location: Albany, NY

Postby !azzip » Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:06 am

wegotdome wrote:Legit clicked on this thinking it was about cheez its
User avatar
!azzip
Mind the d, ladies
 
Posts: 13745
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: sf

Postby Vspooky » Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:52 am

wegotdome wrote:Legit clicked on this thinking it was about cheez its

Came to post about the tobasco flavor being the best.
User avatar
Vspooky
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:57 am

Postby codync » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:22 am

Fuck Chris Hardwick, long live extra toasty Cheez Its
codync
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:08 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC

Postby blackhawks#1 » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:23 am

PaulKersey wrote:I'm shocked this thread got bumped considering a dickhead felt the need to change the title so it became completely unrecognizable as a Me Too thread.

get him
User avatar
blackhawks#1
HELL YES
 
Posts: 41267
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:39 am
Location: chicago

Postby captainsunshine » Mon Jun 18, 2018 9:30 am

!azzip wrote:
wegotdome wrote:Legit clicked on this thinking it was about cheez its

yeah I came in here thinking "i posted in a 7+ page thread about cheez-its??"
User avatar
captainsunshine
Frasier Superfan
 
Posts: 47329
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 5:18 pm
Location: Behind the control console at KACL Radio

Previous


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Apex Satanist, ass eyes, Avoidance Learning, Baidu [Spider], blackhawks#1, captainsunshine, creativexcover, degradation, dogdicksummer3, DrewBlood, DryBones, DUTCH MASTA KILLA, EscapedFromTheValley, F.T.W.etBoi, Killedbyschool, krujones, Last Rites, Lil Meatsauce, longjohn, Majestic-12 [Bot], MasterMacheteSquad, Nightstalker, PaulKersey, quit_everything, Rowan, smorgasgeorge, Spider Jerusalem, taylorm, tehscott, uglynproud71, Worship and 68 guests