Whaddaya MEAN You've Never Heard of Me?!?

Last week, I had a doc appt on Wednesday. I hate going to the doc. Actually, I hate going anywhere. I don't like being around people or in environments I don't have any control over. The older I become, the worse this is. But I needed med refills and an A1C, so I arranged my whole week so I'd be sure to make it to this appointment.

The doc was sick and canceled on me. That sucked. It was almost shopping day, so I needed my refills called in. I made another appt for Friday--the last possible day to get them called in so we could pick them up on grocery day.
The doc was still sick and canceled again. At this point, I was annoyed for myself and kinda worried for my doc. Also, I asked the nurse to call in all my scrips.

Long story short, nothing worked. I still don't have my meds and it's Wednesday afternoon. Right now, my left foot has been tapping for about 2 1/2 days. I'm supposed to be working, but my attention span is shorter than JoJo's. It took me three hours to figure out what to have for dinner because even thinking about it seemed so overwhelming that I almost just went back to bed. My anxiety is through the roof. Then I made the foolish mistake of reading the news--the kind of news that really makes me wish we owned a car. I hate for H to be out and about so late at night. He doesn't even tell me now when cops hassle him and ask his business. I worry so much that he doesn't want to worry me further--which in turn makes me feel like a basket case a'la Myra in Deathtrap.

I've also been doing this new thing, where I train my brain to stop thinking about something awful and start thinking about...absolutely anything else. So when I remember that Nightmare Client thinks he totally got one over on us, I can make my brain think about something else (like say, Doctor Who) instead of getting angrier and angrier until I'm punching pillows. It's been going well. I'm getting pretty good about this--even knowing that many people developed this skill as children. I'm a crazy-pants, and I'm just getting around to it now.
It's a whole lot more difficult without my psyche meds. I even caught myself wondering if my doc wasn't messing with me on purpose because I'm so shitty about attending appointments. But that would be insane, right? That's the rambling of a paranoid mind, right? RIGHT?!?

Watching The Daily Show though, always helps me feel better. No matter how crazy I get, I still have a complete understanding of why Barack Obama wasn't at work in the Oval Office during 9/11. Because seriously, WHAT?!?

So yeah, my mind is going both fast and slow. It's laser focused on stuff that doesn't matter while being completely unable to focus on the stuff I need to do. Should be awesome to see how this all impacts my review of American Horror Story tonight.

You know what's weird? Given the popularity of Harry Potter fandom with women my age, I'd have expected people in my social media feeds to be losing their minds over Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. They weren't. Nobody has been all "Oh, you haven't read it yet?!? It's soooo good." None of that. Now that I've read it, I totally understand why.

( Cut, because here and Goodreads are some of the only places you can still cut for spoilers. )

So if you feel like reading it and don't want to spend, let me know and I'll loan it to you for Kindle. It's a pretty short read.

As most of you know, we lost our battle with Nightmare Client's bank, and he robbed us of almost $3,000 (plus fees). Later, he had some rented legal firm send us a hilarious "cease and desist" that suggests that I posted a bunch of bad Amazon reviews on his terrible book (which would be absolutely legal for me to do, though I didn't do that). Losing the money was a drag, but not ruinous to us thanks to everyone having our backs. I still think it's some bullshit that we weren't even allowed to talk to the people at NC's bank. PayPal purportedly argued for us, but we have no idea what happened or what was said. Even more than the money, it bites that NC actually gets to walk away thinking he was vindicated. The bank didn't remotely get the full story.

Anyway...I learned recently that Alex Nouri (that's Nightmare Client's name, BTW. I see no more reason not to release it) has pulled the same fuckery with another freelancer. From what I can tell, it was the same bullshit that happened with us. Incessant Emails and phone calls, demanding near constant attention, pretending that not hearing back within the hour is "unprofessional." Shit like that. All the while, this ass professes to be "patient" and "understanding." I'm pretty sure he's a drunk, and he seems to have some mental health issues as well. So when the freelancer has finally had enough and walks away, the chargebacks begin even though the work is done. That's also when the bizarre accusations start.

You know how some people talk about how they have friends in high places? Apparently NC has friends who are cops, lawyers, bankers, politicians, and more. Yet he can't seem to convince more than one person (who I strongly suspect is him) to leave his book a good review? Nickel, please.

What I want is to blast this jackasses name and history of fuckery to every freelancer known to mankind. I want to make sure no one is EVER taken advantage of by this self-important, ignorant fuckstick again. I'm putting together a list of warning sites for editors, writers, graphic and web designers, and would love it if you all can hip me to the ones you know about or recommend.

Never in my life have I met (let alone worked with) someone so simultaneously ignorant and arrogant. It boggles the mind that he thinks so much of himself while being such a stupid, needy numpty...I need to contact the people of Scotland so I can amass a more appropriate list of insults. ;-) Despite my impressive vocabulary, I really don't have the words to adequately convey my disgust for this preening jackass and his laughable excuse for "writing" as he steals from hardworking freelancers in revenge for not constantly getting his way. (I can't put a live hyperlink in a print book no matter how hard I try, and I can't magically start coding after saying again and again that I don't code).

Weather wise, in-between seasons are my most hated times of year. It's hot in here, 76 degrees in fact--with the door wall slightly open (we can't open it a lot, because JoJo goes through screens like I go through Nature Valley cashew bars). I turned the fan on (the one that connects through the heat/air) and it's still 76 friggin degrees in here. Plus it's humid. I loathe humidity.

I ordered us a fan from Amazon. Amazon Prime used to offer overnight shipping for $5 more. Now it's $7 more. Not only that, but Saturday used to count as a business day. But today, I ordered a fan and with two-day shipping, I won't have it until Tuesday. Still, it's cheaper than getting a cab to the store and back. That would actually cost more than the fan itself.

So, whine whine, complain complain...because my brain refuses to function when it's this hot.

I was watching That 70's Show recently because TVLand or whoever started them over from the beginning. Before Eric and Donna got together, Hyde made a pretty serious play for Donna. He even learned how to dance so he could dance with her when they skipped town to go to a disco. Her response? "Shut up and dance." Here's what Hyde did:
Kept dancing.
Maintained a respectful distance.
Was happy for his best friend when he got together with her.
Let it go.

What didn't Hyde do?
Kiss her anyway.
Call her a bitch/tease/whore/slut/dyke/etc.
Tell her how sorry she'd be some day.
Shoot up a women's studies class.
Keep pestering her in the hopes that she'd change her mind.
Remind her and everyone else what a Nice Guy (TM) he was.
Develop a disturbing and ever-growing hatred of women.

Even though Hyde is considered less than a moral ideal on that show, he was totally cool about the things that matter. Steven Hyde teaches us that you can drink underage, smoke pot, be lazy on occasion, reject the establishment, and come from a trashy family of terrible people--and still be a good person.

The concept of friend-zoning someone is still pretty hilarious to me. I suspect that teens have been subjected to such a glut of stupid romantic comedies and teen sex romp movies that boys think they have some sort of dramatic imperative to "fight for" and "win" the girl of their dreams. If they don't, they're either a complete loser or they "gave up too soon." That's a shame, because the idea of waiting around until She suddenly sees you as a sex god is about as silly as asking Elon Musk to turn you into Captain America.

I grew up as a fat teenager in the 80's. Back in the day, the concept of "friend zoning" did not exist. If you liked someone and they didn't like you that way you were supposed to get the hell over it and move on. Hanging around with them in the hopes that they'd change their mind about you was considered pathetic. Trust me, I know of whence I speak on this. Never, at no time, EVER was the object of your affection considered an asshole for the mere "crime" of not finding you attractive. Why? Because that would be stupid. That's not how attraction works. And yeah, those unrequited teenage crushes can hurt like hell, I know that too. But your pain doesn't mean anyone owes you anything.

As far as I've seen women never expect someone who doesn't find them attractive to suddenly do so after they're nice for a long time or whatever. But somehow, lots of men do. What's more--these men are often the last ones who would consider dating a fat chick or someone considered not stereotypically beautiful. I'm reminded of the American Dad episode where Francine "lets herself go" to prove that Stan loves her for her true self, and he ends up putting his own eyes out because she's so ugly to him that he can't look at her. He says something like 'Francine, I want a beautiful wife. If marriage was about connection, I'd have married that fat girl I had all those great conversations with.'

This philosophy basically boils down to, "Why don't any really HOT girls realize that beauty is only skin deep?" Because life is not a beer commercial, you assholes. And hanging around waiting for your "nice" friendship to morph into a sex parade is not what a "nice guy" would do.
It's what predators do.

I haven't posted at all in February yet. So I feel like I should even though I don't have much to say. Oh wait, there is one thing.

If you're voting for Hillary Clinton solely because you think "it's about time for a woman president," you should shut your face. Sure, it would be nice if gender was less an issue when we choose politicians. But gender isn't relevant to whether or not someone is right for the job, would do a good job, or is the strongest choice for the position at hand.

Me, I don't find Hillary to be trustworthy. She always seems fake and forced, plus she loves big banks. I get that she's experienced and strong-willed, but if she's not strong-willed about stuff I think is important (single payer health care, $15 or higher minimum wage, less war), why the hell should I support her?

Am I the only one who remembers that Glenn Frey was kind of an asshole? Not quite as bad as Don Henley though.

Both of those dudes were bitter jags when the Beavis and Butthead album knocked Eagles Greatest Hits off the charts. "I guess we'll all get together in 20 years for the Beavis and Butthead reunion."

And then we did.

Because Beavis and Butthead are hilarious.

Every now and then, someone will express surprise to me that I have this person or that person as an online friend, despite them spouting unpopular views or having strong opinions I don't agree with, or even doing shitty things like posting spoilers on purpose. But people who know me well know that I enjoy dialoging about tough topics--especially among those with whom I disagree. I don't want my life to be an echo chamber of shit I already agree with. Plus, I don't know everything, and people I don't agree with are more likely to know shit that I don't know. Though they might still be bugfuck wrong. ;-)

Today I saw a post referencing Jessica Jones on Netflix. Someone else was basically saying that because in the first episode, there was a single joke they didn't like (a joke that was insensitive to, and at the expense of, fat people), they "had no interest in" the rest of the series. Now obviously, people can choose to watch whatever the hell they want. But I found it curious that this post came from a person who, every day, argues that people need to seek out information that conflicts with what they've been taught, and that they need to be more respectful of alternate/new viewpoints. I really can see both sides of this.

On the one hand, we can all choose only to expose ourselves to people, things, ideas, and speech that is to our liking. For most people, watching TV is a leisure time activity and is supposed to be fun. Plenty of people watch TV and movies to escape the bullshit they see out in the world--so the last friggin thing they need is to see mean shit on their down time.
Personally, I like my viewing material to be more challenging, so I often seek out things that will make me think, feel discomfort, ponder and debate, or get really, really scared as I wonder what I'd do if what was happening to the characters was happening to me. But that's me--overall, my life is pretty easy.

On the other hand, I think it's myopic and incredibly limiting to say "I don't like something this character said, so I'm not going to expose myself to any of this material." In this case, that means missing out on the entirety of Jessica Jones, which would be a bummer for anyone who appreciates complex characters, or in-depth discussion of issues like responsibility, trauma, control, and consent. Plus, it's an awesome cast in a well-plotted show that everyone can get something out of--you know, unless they bail after Ep1.
When I say, "It's only a show," I'm not saying that what happens in fiction doesn't matter because it's just pretend. But I *am* saying that fictional characters shouldn't have the same impact as real-life people doing and saying real-life things. If they do, you might need to step back.
The characters in the TV aren't your friends. The rules of interpersonal communication do not apply. Watching a program doesn't make you complicit in the actions of the fictional characters--not even the protagonists. The Godfather is one of the greatest films ever made. Yet most of us don't leave the theatre wishing we had Luca Brasi's job. It's possible to laugh at Three's Company (for lack of a better example) without actually thinking homophobia is hilarious or that gay people deserve to be mocked or belittled.
Surely we're not so fragile that we have to scurry away from any speech we don't like, or pretend that everyone who appears in fictional media has to conform to our personal standards of morality or interpersonal communication-- or we just can't bear to look?!? Or is it a question of feeling "disrespected" by jokes? It might bear keeping in mind that TV shows and movies aren't made with any 1 audience member in mind. If they were, we'd probably know that before tuning in. Why is it so easy for some of us to be offended by people who literally don't know we exist? I'm certainly guilty of this.

It's possible that I'm assigning emotions or motivations incorrectly to behaviors I don't like. It might be that I loathe the superior air with which people say "I don't watch THAT" as if not watching something is analogous to actually doing something that helps oppressed people. Maybe it's the idea that you really can't have dramatic conflict in a world where no one has a problem with women, or men, or rich people, or poor people, or racial minorities, or religious minorities, or fat people, trans people, gay people, people with disabilities, people with mental illness, or takes issue with how people dress, how they dance, who they date, where they come from, or whether or not they can grammar.
EVERYONE sees the world through their own filters. EVERYONE judges other people for reasons seen and unseen. If you think you don't, sorry--but you're a filthy liar.
The more types of people we expose ourselves to, the more we learn about our fellow humans. Obviously, there are valid reasons not to befriend a mafioso, or a gaggle of methheads, or a pray-the-gay-away commune in real-life. But in media? One of the best steps we can take toward understanding each other is to expose ourselves to as much varied media as we can--and do our best to understand what we see viscerally--not just turning our backs on new material one rough comment in. We can do better than that. And for most of us, our lives are comfortable enough that we can safely expose ourselves to a whole helluva lot via the media at our disposal without collapsing into a quivering puddle of sobs or annoying short-lived outrage that doesn't go anywhere.

So kids, watch what you like--or don't watch. But if I may personify Television for a moment: I promise that the mean old TV-box isn't going to hurt you unless you let it. It's just a box. I promise. And if you let fear and potential discomfort keep you from exploring all the box has to offer, the least you can do is not blame it on the box.

Have you seen this picture?

Some lady posted it on Facebook, saying how funny it was that her kid would probably never forgive her. The pic got tons of comments of people LOLing and guffawing over how knee-slappingly hysterical it is that the kid was so angry. People are sharing it all over as if this kid's pain and feelings of betrayal are the stuff of real comedy.

Not surprisingly, it makes me sick.
Look, I get that it's common for parents to collude to tell most American kids the same dumb lie about a jolly fat guy who breaks into their house and leaves gifts. Of course, people breaking into houses isn't funny, no, not even when it happens to little MacCauley Culkin. Kids taking things from strangers used to also be strongly cautioned against--until we figured out that most kids are kidnapped or molested by people they already know. But yeah, I do understand that Santa is a fun thing for parents to do. Ditto that "there's a doll watching you at all times," elf thing. I get that many people think "pretending" is different from lying, and that this distinction is different in every household. When your teenager "pretends" that they were studying when they were actually out getting high and having sex--I doubt that it will be seen as "hilarious" or "just part of growing up" the way the Santa lie is. Even if "every kid goes through that."

Surely, once the kid actually asks whether Santa (or the Easter bunny, tooth fairy, Jesus) is real or made-up, a parent has an obligation to tell the truth? Everyone keeps telling me it's harmless, or even a good thing for parents to lie to kids. I'm just not seeing it. Of course, I have enough issues that my own life isn't a prime example of what any parent should or should not do. But I can't get my head around why you'd lie to a kid if you don't want them to lie to you.

Let's say though, that lying to kids is fine because they're just kids and kids should just shut up and do what they're told. It's not, but let's say that it is.
Once you realize that your lie has hurt and upset your child, that they don't believe they can trust you anymore and are devastated--why the fuck would you be laughing at that?
If I understand this right, the "joke" is that Santa isn't very important and that kids will "get over it." Maybe parents have forgotten that being a kid is not easy. You're little, you can't do all the things people around you can do. You're trying to figure everything out and find your place in the world you live in. Why the hell is it FUNNY for the people who are supposed to be helping you to a) lie to you, and b) laugh at the fact that their lies have compromised your relationship? Isn't laughing at pain you caused the action of a playground bully?

To a kid, Santa is a very, very big deal. Personally, I used to wish that Santa would find my real parents who were happy and successful and really wanted me around--but I digress. Santa is as important to a kid as your marriage is to you. If you got a divorce, would it be FUNNY for your ex to post a vid of you crying? After all, you'll "get over it," right? Maybe all his buddies can laugh at how upset you are--because thinking that marriage would last was (like Santa) utterly ridiculous, right? Sheesh.

How much more disgusted is it possible to be with one's countrymen? Every time I think I've reached maximum disgust between the Tea Party and all their nonsense, in-your-face gun activists who can't go out to dinner without packing major heat, and Donald Trump being treated as if he's actually a viable presidential candidate--I get schooled on how cowardly and terrible Americans can be.

I know plenty of Christians online and in RL--of all stripes. I know Mormons who think it's their duty to keep having more children as long as they can, even though they aren't able to support them financially. I know Baptists who were taught, and still struggle with, slut-shaming being the duty of any good parent. I know Catholics who honestly believe that using birth control is a one-way ticket to damnation. I don't agree with these things. Frankly, I doubt the veracity of those who claim to honestly adopt these beliefs as part of their worship of a purportedly benevolent god.

But here's the thing: I've been hearing for years now about how we have to do everything the bible says, lest we be immoral. Of course the people who say this don't really mean it--because they wear glasses to church, eat shrimp, don poly-cotton blends, get haircuts, etc, etc, etc. They also don't own slaves or force rape victims to marry their attackers. But hey, we have to follow at least the spirit of the bible, right? For morality? That's why we're supposed to applaud people like Cliven whatever the fuck who trespassed to graze his cattle, or Kim Davis who "took a stand" against those awful gays with all that gayness. It's because of the bible that we have to refuse to make pizzas for gay weddings or rip our kids out of scouts because the leader is gay. It's why Planned Parenthood is getting ridden out of town on a rail despite a profound and immediate need for it. Because Jesus, because bible.

But now...that war orphans, widows, displaced families are desperately seeking asylum--what do we do? "Sorry, all full. Sorry (not sorry) but none of you can come here." Shit, this cowardly bullshit is even coming from the very people who wouldn't even fucking be here if it wasn't for the US taking in refugees. I'm looking at YOU, Ted Cruz, you shrewish sack of crap. And the Anne Frank thing? It's actually true. She might still be alive now if we hadn't wanted to "stay out of it."

If you have honestly informed yourself about the Paris attacks and the overall refugee situation caused by Daesh (which was, in fact, largely caused by the good ol' US of A), and your takeaway is that they're all Muslims which means all terrorists which means GTFO? You are a monster. You aren't living by traditional Christian morality, and you sure as fuck don't believe that #AllLivesMatter despite your insistence to the contrary. As many others have said better than I: By refusing refugees, we are giving in to terrorists. We're giving them exactly what they want.

The "that's too bad, but this isn't my problem" school of foreign policy has been our ugliest export for some time. We fuck with any country that has something we want, claiming it's about 'necessary regime change' or 'exporting democracy.' But we do fuckall in countries where abominations happen all the goddamn time. Why aren't we helping oppressed Chinese workers? Or any of the other non-Paris places that have been bombed by terrorists in the last few weeks? Because we don't actually care about the people in these places. As a nation, we only care about what we can get from them.

The United States of America has the biggest, baddest, most well-funded armed forces in the world. Yet we're cowering in fear at people running for their lives from the very people we profess to hate? Are we really that lily-livered? Where are all the gun-enthusiasts who need fucking rocket launchers and semi-auto machine guns to "protect their families?" Why aren't they standing by the borders, ushering refugees in and offering to dispatch anyone who tries any terrorist shit?
No, I don't think we are entirely cowardly. But I do think we're that hateful. I think we, as a people, are absolutely callous enough to hear about refugees and think "Well who the hell told them to live in [insert godforsaken hellhole here] in the first place?" You know, the same way people say "Hey, if you didn't want to be treated like shit for 50 hours a week and still not be able to afford a doctor, why'd you choose to work at [minimum wage shithole]?"

The response to this refugee crisis is another embarrassingly ugly case of demonizing victims because it's easier to hate than to help. It's simpler to say "Hey, they brought this on themselves," than to say "Holy shit, that's awful--what can I do to help." It may be true that taking in displaced people or donating $50 won't "solve" the problem of terrorism. There will always be disgruntled assholes who think hurting people is fun and use that excuse to advance some bugfuck ideology. But what there should never be, are people who see these atrocities and say "I'd like to help, but helping might make something go badly for me, so I don't think I'll even try."

I've seen the way some of you react when your basement floods. Now imagine that your house was blown up, half your family dead, your son stolen and forced to fight for terror, and you're literally running for your life. Now imagine a bunch of comfy AF Americans sitting amid central heating, watching Netflix and eating food they can drive to the store and get without anyone shooting at them--got it? Imagine them saying that you can't stay in an empty hotel and get a cold shower and decent sleep, because they're afraid you might be the people you're actually fleeing from.
Then tell me you wouldn't fucking hate the people who did that to you.

So if you're saying that, if you're saying anything like that--stop it.
Just fucking stop.

It seems we need a reminder, so here's an updated list of things. What kind of things? Well, these are things which--if you do them--make it perfectly fine to label you as an asshole. Don't want to be an asshole? Start by not doing these things.

--Post spoilers. We're all glad that you have time to watch The Walking Dead as it airs. But for people with kids, jobs, lives, can't afford cable, etc--they have to watch later. Telling everyone what happens without giving a shit about their enjoyment of the show makes you an asshole. Stop being an asshole.

--Bullshit. Making ridiculous, bullshit assertions online probably already makes you an asshole. But if you're asked for facts to back up your buffoonery and reply "Hey, I'm not gonna do your research for you," you are an asshole. Don't make absurd statements if you can't back them up with facts. And by "facts," I don't mean FOX news, Brietbart, Blaze, or any other bullshit rag. Also, you're not being a "devil's advocate," nor are you "just sayin'." Stop being an asshole.

--Make fun of someone's shitty job. Everyone needs money to live (unless you're a rich asshole or someone else is paying your way). Mocking someone for the degrading job they have, the paltry money they receive, or the horrible treatment they get from customers or bosses is NOT funny. Don't make fun of people for working--especially if you're also the kind of asshole that talks shit about people who get SNAP, disability, or unemployment. Stop being an asshole.

--Turn every discussion into extremes. Gun control does not mean "take everyone's guns away and never let anyone have them again." Pro-choice doesn't mean "taxpayer funded abortions for everyone." Saying no subject is off limits for comedy doesn't mean it'll be a celebration of racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. Everyone you don't like isn't Hitler. Everyone who disagrees with you is not "oppressive." Stop being an asshole.

--Your kids. I like kids, honestly I do. But when you let them come into my house and trash the place because you'd rather smoke my pot than watch them--you're not just being an asshole. You're teaching assholery to a new generation. Sure, dropping something is an accident--which is why the kid was told not to pick it up in the first place. No, I don't expect a small child to know better. I expect you, the fucking parent, to know better and act accordingly. Stop being an asshole.

--Borrowing shit. Not everything I own is okay for borrowing. Stop making that face. We've probably all lost shit to "borrowing," and it sucks. It may not be personal that I'm not letting you borrow a signed, numbered copy of something. But even if it is, I'm under no obligation to let anyone take my shit out of my home. Stop being an asshole about it.

--Lying. I know a lot of the same people you know. So if you're out there spewing crap about people I love (or me), we'll all find out about it eventually. I'm genuinely sorry that the giant chip on your shoulder prevents you from being honest. But if you make it my problem, you may be shocked at how thoroughly I remove you from my life. And you have yourself to blame--because you were an asshole.

--"Sorry, not sorry." Fuck you. Just fuck you. Sorry, not sorry the current "I'm not racist but..." or "I'm not a complete asshole, but..." Sorry, not sorry to be the one to break it to you--but you ARE a complete asshole. Stop it.

On a huge "She Wants Revenge" kick after the Hunger-inspired killy group sex scene in the AHSH premiere last night. Not a bad ep, but as usual, seeing everyone complain about how much they dislike the show (that they somehow keep watching in the 5th year) is equally fun. I can't imagine hate-watching a show this fun, but to each their own, I suppose.

Was delighted to see that Kevin McCarthy (no, not the good one from Invasion of the Body Snatchers and UHF and such) is no longer trying to be Speaker of the House. Seems that if you hate gays, think women are stupid, and loathe the immigrants you hire to do the shit you think is beneath you, the only thing that can make the GOP hate you is you giving up their plan. So yeah, telling everyone that Benghazi was just a long con to discredit Hillary was never going to go his way. Even though most of us knew that already. Still, it's terrifying to think that John Boehner is the lesser of many evils in that instance.

BTW, I saw a few people making jokes about Boehner's orange face and not knowing what's up with that. Kids, Boehner is an alcoholic--the sort that drinks all day. When some people drink, they get red in the face. That makes it really obvious that they're stumbling around wasted, which is still considered unbecoming of a congressman--even on the right. Hence, the orange face that makes the red accents less obvious. You're welcome.

Been spending less time on the internets lately.
Result?
I hate people slightly less than I usually do.

Facebook does this weird thing now where it keeps automatically switching the feed I'm reading back to the "home" feed. The Home feed has the posts of every (according to FB's weird "we're hiding tons of random posts from people you've already said you want to read, because fuck you" matrix) person who I've friended back, and all their shitty ramblings. Whereas I read from a list called "Buddies," which is people and groups I'm genuinely interested in, and haven't hidden or blocked due to the barrage of misinformed, hateful, or churchy garbage that makes my blood boil. So when I'm reading my list and suddenly come across 5 "repost if you love Jesus" memes in a row followed by some hateful shit about fat people, welfare recipients, or Obama--I know FB has switched me back.

And yes, boiling blood is a major health issue for me.
Even worse than back pain.

That said, this Ashley Madison thing is bumming me out. Specifically, the glee with which people celebrate the doxxing and even subsequent suicides of people who were doing things that are, in short, none of anyone's goddamn business. Sure, if you're lying to your partner--you're probably an asshole. Though your partner might be a worse asshole. Or you might want to keep your family together for your kids. Or you might be in a place where you had little or no choice over who you'd marry. Or you might be somewhere you could be killed for being gay or trans. Or your partner might not care if you have affairs as long as they aren't humiliated publicly over it.
In short, if you think the Ashley Madison hackers are a benevolent group of justice-seekers standing up for marital fidelity, you're fucking kidding yourselves. At best, they are jaded asshats who've been hurt by a cheater and therefore don't care who else gets hurt as they punish a few strangers for things that are--again, none of their goddamn business.
If you're defending the shits who think doxxing is funny or "justice," I hope you take a long look at the way you live. Ask yourself if you do anything you wouldn't want splashed all over the alternative internet--and eventually the regular internet. Anything strangers would be thrilled to shame you for, that could potentially hurt your spouse, children, parents, friends, jobs, or anyone else you've dared to care about. Maybe ease up on the internet lynch mobs and concentrate on living your life as best you can. And stop being such self-righteous assholes.

Think I'll address some of the stupidity I'm seeing on the internets here. It allows me to get it off my ample chest without having to interact with idiots. Here goes:

--If you're opposed to abortion because you're "sick of women abdicating their responsibilities" you've just admitted that you think raising a child for 18 years is a suitable punishment for the terrible crime of having sex. Go fuck yourself.

--If you think that, and don't support harsh crimes (like jail and forfeiture) for men who sire children and then are not involved fathers who support their children financially, you've just admitted that you're punishing women for sex--but not men. Go fuck yourself.

--If you think women should be forced to bring embryos or foetuses to term, but then vote for people who slash education, SNAP, WIC, oppose the ACA, or accuse mothers of being "welfare queens," you are not pro-life. You're pro-foisting-your-hangups on others. Go fuck yourself.

--No one has suggested that gun control will end all gun crimes forever. Nobody is that stupid. If you have reduced the gun-control argument to that, you're purposely twisting the issue. Go fuck yourself.

--Guns are not a magical amulet that prevents harm from befalling you--which I'm sorry to say that people have essentially said to me. "I need guns, because only guns can defend blah blah blah." Statistically, having a gun makes you more likely to be shot...either by yourself or someone in your household. Still want one--be my guest. But let's not pretend that those who prefer not to are asking to have violence done to them.

--Guns can and do go off when dropped. Sorry gun fans, there are many documented cases. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but drop safety standards only apply to handguns anyway. Most rifles, shotguns, and the like are not subject to drop-tests as a matter of law.

--Jade Helm 15 is not a plot by the government to take over the South and institute martial law. But even if it were--aren't a lot of you pro-fire-power types longing for martial law anyway?

--Even if Jade Helm 15 was a plot to take over the south, you and a couple of buddies in camo pants aren't going to stop the US Army Special Forces, the Navy Seals, or any other specialized military group. You're kidding yourselves.

--Hitting your kid out of anger is indeed abusive. It's not "discipline" because it doesn't teach anything except 'watch out or you'll get hit again'. Discipline is teaching someone what acceptable behavior is. Hitting is punishment, which some do think is a valid parenting option, but it doesn't teach anyone a goddamn thing--except maybe "one or more of my parents is violent and unstable." Not sure if what you're doing to a kid is abuse? Ask yourself, "Would I do this to an adult in a public place? If I did, could I be arrested?" If you answered No to the first question and/or Yes to the second--that's abuse.

Wow, I feel so much better now.

Good ol' Maude. If you know her in RL, tell her from me that she's awesome.

I really wish I didn't have to use Facebook sometimes. They are such lame pains in the ass about this name business.

As you may know, they logged me out of my account last Thursday morning, telling me I had to prove to them that I was using my real name. Why they couldn't just google me, I do not know. Since I use that name on both of my own websites, plus every online account I've ever had, it seems like that would be the easiest way. But no, they gave me one week to get my documents in order.

The next day I sent them their required ID (my wedding certificate, and 2 pieces of mail from different senders--neither of which were hand written). After 6 days, I heard nothing. Suddenly today, I'm locked out again. I resent everything, and am still waiting to hear. Now not only can I not use my Facebook account--I can't use any account that I usually sign into via Facebook. So no YouTube, no commenting on various websites, all that annoying shit.

And like an idiot, I have business correspondences that happen through Facebook, so I can't do some of my regular work. I don't even know how long this bullshit will take.

Funny thing, when I was paying them for advertising, or back when I'd occasionally pay for game perks--they had no such desire to confirm my identity. Now suddenly it's some huge problem?

Keep in mind, that this is a site that says right in their TOS that they don't have the ability to keep our info safe. Yet they want a pic of my driver's license (even though I don't drive), my marriage certificate, and all this other shit? Just to prove that nobody is impersonating me? Fuck that shit, Facebook. Fuck it right in the ear.

Worst of all, they couch these intrusive requirements as a matter of safety for me, and truthiness for them. Bullshit. It's as much bullshit as when Google tells me that giving them my phone number makes me "safe" when all it really does is increase the amount of scam texts and calls I get. All this name bullshit combined with their facial recognition software makes this something downright Orwellian.

So why couldn't they look over my shit when I sent it 6 days ago? Nobody knows. You can't talk to or even Email an actual person. I have roughly a dozen bylines using this name on different sites: LJ, DW, Kinkly, ZZN, Associated Content, Geekbinge, Puckermob, Articlecats, Disqus, and a few more that are eluding me at the moment, plus my own pro website, Amazon, Under the Bed, and The Horror Within, not to mention the scads and oodles of fiction I've published.

What a fucking pain in the ass.

My name is Wednesday Lee Friday, and I despise Facebook's bullshit policies.
And we have always been at war with Eurasia.

I fucking hate Mother's Day.
I hate it.

And I hate it even worse when...
dammit, I can't even...

I'm fine now.
But it's just such a difficult goddamn day.

To be angry on top of it is almost too damn much.
Seriously. --the fuck.


And you know what's weird?
Mad Men was actually more depressing than Game of Thrones.
Isn't that weird?
PS. Don't fall for it, Trudy.

It appears that Trevor Noah is the latest comedian to face a shitstorm on the Twitters. Now that he's been announced as Jon Stewart's replacement on TDS, bloggers have taken the time to go through his previous years of tweets, searching for things to be outraged about. Of course, they found a few. Among other things, he made some fat jokes. I don't approve. But you know, Jon Stewart appeared on TDS in a fat suit and there was no steamrolling Twitter army calling for him to be fired for it.

As someone who often finds herself defending people like Seth MacFarlane or Lena Dunham, I have to say "What the fuck, Internets?" Are we really so lazy that we have to decide the totality of a person based on a single <140 character sentence? OMG, someone made a joke I don't immediately think is funny--let's get them fired! This has happened to a few people, and had been attempted many other times. Really? We really think if someone says something we don't like--that they should lose their livelihood? That sounds like the mindset of a petulant asshat resentful of the fact that people are legally allowed to disagree with them.

When Obama first got elected, I talked a lot about how people didn't "get" him because he speaks in paragraphs rather than slogans and zingers. Now that everybody and the Nerdist's mother is on Twitter, this problem has gotten much, much worse. It seems that people are so willing and ready to declare people as Hateful for using the wrong word, for a joke that falls flat, for anything outside the party line. Sadly, social progressives are just as likely to form these mobs as conservatives are--and just as likely to cloak themselves in self-righteousness while doing so.

Sorry, but if you really want to be a tolerant person, you can't lash out at everyone and everything who thinks differently than you do. If you don't like someone's joke, maybe complain a bit and then watch something else. Or consider making it a teaching moment. Assume that terrible statements are made out of ignorance, rather than hate. If it turns out to be hate after all, disengage. If you're only tolerant of shit you already like, you're not being tolerant at all.

To paraphrase Jurassic Park: The Internet is one of the most powerful forces on Earth, and people wield it like a kid who's found his dad's gun.
Sure, Twitter et al can be a force for change. That doesn't mean it has to be a hammer used by virtual lynch mobs to terrorize anyone who dares say something we don't agree with. No. not even if they're hateful. Not even if they're wrong, stupid, or think bad thoughts. No one should be threatened, doxxed, or have their web pages hacked for the terrible crime of being an idiot, or even an asshole. People don't deserve to be fired for things they say in private--even appalling things. That's one of the reasons I don't support Hate Crimes legislation. I prefer that we punish people for their actions, not their thoughts.

Whelp, we didn't make our funding goal. I seem to have dramatically overestimated my own visibility and esteem in the horror community. So, we won't be having a print mag where we pay pro rates any time soon.

Fie!

But you know, that doesn't mean we're all washed up. We have a sweet masthead, a cool logo, and a staff who seems to want to keep it going. I'm pondering doing a quarterly digital antho, or maybe running The Horror Within as a website (one of our feature writers came up with that idea). This is something we can probably afford if any one of the many gigs I'm working toward pans out. We can certainly post regular features a few times a month, and maybe showcase some novel chapters and reprint fiction that deserves more notice. And we can have a newsletter so people can sign up if they want. Our main expense there would be paying someone to build the Wordpress site. I already have hosting and stuff.

In the mean time, I'm working on getting some out of print lit back on sale. And yeah, I did pick out an unfinished manuscript that totally deserves to see the light of day. Who knows, maybe I'll actually finish the Millicent Mixter draft while I'm about it.

Even though this turns out to be a fail, I'm not feeling like a failure because of it. If you read my self-indulgent rantings often--you'll know that this is kind of a big deal.

I've been thinking a lot about cops lately, and the problems many of us have with them. Aside from the multiple unpunished murders of unarmed civilians, I learned recently that in many places, cops are legally allowed to have sex with prostitutes before arresting them. This is, I am told, done in the name of "gathering evidence." When you read the article, you'll note that the cop who pointed out to the press that this is legal and "by the book" lost his job--while the one who fucks prostitutes while being paid by taxpayers did not.

Let's look at that. Prostitution is a crime. Paying a prostitute for sex is a crime. So this means it's okay for a cop to commit a crime in order to stop a "more serious" crime. How serious could the crime be if cops are legally allowed to commit it? How long does it take for a cop to find a prostitute, have sex with her, then arrest and book her for the crime of engaging in sex with him? How might that time be better allocated into things that actually help citizens?

Honestly, unless you have a spouse who cheats with pros, I defy anyone to explain to me a way in which their life has been adversely affected by prostitution. Aside from sex trafficking, abusive pimps, and other bi-products of the black market--I don't even know why prostitution is illegal in the first place.

The NYPD went on a half-assed work stoppage recently. It seems their widdle fewwings were hurt when the mayor said he has given his son tips on how not to be shot by police. This petulant tantrum of a work stoppage came in the form of--and I'm not kidding--only making arrests that were "necessary." Arrests went down 66%, leading some to conclude that well over half of all arrests made by the NYPD are total bullshit. Couple this with stop and frisk stats, and you've got a pretty ugly picture being painted. Remember, this work stoppage was intended to be a "screw you" to the mayor--and a tacit admission that the city budget relies heavily on fines levied on these bullshit "crimes" that cops have since admitted are Not Necessary.

I realize that the typical stereotype of any cop on the job more than say 5 years is that they're angry, racist, drunk, and if they're still married--that the marriage is hanging on by a thread. I bet there are things we can do to make things easier on cops that don't involve giving them a free pass to beat or kill civilians, or to get busy with hookers as part of the work day. I don't know what though. I confess, I'm ignorant of how most cops live each day. I'm also ignorant of the rules they follow in order to get the job done.

But I shouldn't be.

I think citizens should be able to get a copy of current police codes of conduct. I want to know what they're told during training, and what the specific rules of their jobs are. After all, cops are paid via tax dollars which come from citizens--even citizens who have at some point, broken a law. See, if you work, you pay taxes. That should give you a say in how you're governed and under what rules. Then we can know for sure whether using minority mug shots for target practice is something every cop supports. I bet it isn't.

Why don't we have access to a list of the rules cops are expected to follow? Some will no doubt argue that if we know the rules, criminals will find ways around them. Like maybe prostitutes will stop having sex with clients if they know one might be a cop, or something. But see, that would mean that cops rely on citizens not knowing the law in order to catch them committing crimes. How is that fair? How can there be secret laws and rules that citizens aren't aware of that can be used against us?

I'll ask again--why can't citizens have--for the asking--a copy of the rules that all police follow. Like the Freedom of Information Act, all we should have to do is ask, and we should be sent a copy of the rules governing cops in our city, county, and state. This should be current and unabridged.

What I don't know is how to go about making this happen.
Open to suggestions.

HBO, you are entirely too killy.
Game of Thrones isn't back until March.
So just calm the fuck down, why don't you.
Also, I wasn't actually ready for the series finale to be next week.

You are really trying my patience, HBO.

Been reading articles (and comments--oops!) about shelters for women and children. Apparently, some nobs think they're "sexist" because they only cater to women and children, when way more men are homeless blah blah blah.

For those who are blissfully ignorant as to how these shelters work, a women & children shelter with a secret location is for people who are fleeing from abuse. The secret location is so their abusers can't fucking find them, and therefore not abuse them and the children. It's emphatically NOT "a bunch of feminists who want to keep men out because they think we're all rape-happy." Though now that they bring it up, I can see why someone fleeing from abuse may not have to deal with strangers telling them how pretty they look when they cry. (I have seen this happen in a "regular" homeless shelter.)

If your #NotAllMen fixation is so keenly developed that you actually feel cheated that men aren't allowed in secret-location domestic violence shelters--my suggestion would be to keep spouting that bullshit. Once women everywhere want to smack the shit out of you, you might actually have a valid claim to stay at one of the shelters (and boy howdy, are they luxurious!) you lament.

I've mentioned before that I've given volunteer time and stuff to local shelters, both for the general homeless population, and in what we used to call "battered women's shelters." I don't tend to mention that I've actually stayed at a women's shelter, as a client, when my (now ex, obvs) boyfriend was too dangerously unstable and threatening even for me. I cannot overemphasize the fear, the feelings of failure and embarrassment, the complete and utter shame people feel when they have to turn to such a place. Wait, did I say "people," because I meant "me." I felt terrible fear, shame, humiliation, and as if I had failed everyone who ever believed in me. I can only imagine that it's 100x worse when children are involved.
In addition to that, shelter living is not sitting around all day "living off the government." People staying in any shelter are required to have, or be actively seeking (with proof) a job. They have to pitch in with cooking (try making spaghetti and salad for 50 people and tell me if it feels like work) and cleaning, and must work with a caseworker to get a safe housing plan in place. There are rules, regular drug screens, mandated counseling, and if you break those rules you have to leave no matter how dire your situation.

Women and children who need these shelters often have different needs than the homeless population at large. It is not hyperbole to say that some are fleeing for their lives. Check out the stats on how many women are killed by partners after leaving them. No, one group isn't "better" than another, nor are some "more deserving" of help than others. Every human being deserves a safe, warm place where they can sleep without fear of vermin or violence.
If you honestly have a problem with that, I'd suggest that rather than focusing on the "breaks" others get that you don't--that you take a good long look at whatever ugliness inside you makes you see victims of abuse and say "Damn, I wish I could live like those lazy bastards...seems like a sweet deal." Because while that hateful, misinformed gibberish may not make me want to hit you, it sort of makes me wish that somebody else would.

Actually, I want to talk about gun rights activists--the wacky kind.

Reasonable people can disagree on which gun regulations have the most effect, as well as on the percentage of gun owners who are careful, responsible, and compliant with the laws governing gun purchase, storage, and use. The two extremes of the gun argument seem to be "No one should have guns except soldiers and law enforcement," and "Everyone should have whatever gun they want, and carry it anyplace they want no matter what anyone else thinks."

Obviously, both of these are problematic.

The majority of outspoken gun rights activists are also socially and politically conservative. They use phrases like "take our country back," and espouse the virtues of smaller government and less regulation. Taking Our Country Back sounds inherently bigoted to me, not to mention scary. For me, I'm less unnerved by people wanting guns as I am about the reasons people cite for needing guns.
Defense and hunting are fine by me. Target practice in the middle of a city? No. Carrying large firearms (so large they must be strapped to your body and can still be easily seen from a distance) into a place where families are eating seems not just excessive, but willfully aggressive. Ever watch a movie where people rush into a space carrying huge guns? How many of them are "just exercising their rights?" I can't think of any. But yeah, if you think you need guns to take on the US government (insert Cliven Bundy comments here), our military, or your local police--you're clearly hoping for a scenario in which it's okay to shoot cops. That's a little unnerving too.

So okay, let's say you believe guns should be everywhere--schools, bars, churches, any business that's open to the public. Oh yeah, and the airports. Does this mean that we aren't even going to acknowledge the feelings of people who don't want guns around themselves, or their families? Are we really going to tell business owners that they must allow guns in their stores if they don't want them there? There are plenty of legal things people aren't allowed to do in stores. For example, I've worked several retail jobs where we did not serve any customer wearing a mask--even on Halloween. If a customer walked into a party store in a mask, they were told to remove it, or leave. Why? Because someone wearing a mask might be up to no good. Fucking is legal. Most stores don't let you fuck in them (so WHY do you have beds here, Mr Furniture store?!?) even if you're not showing anything. Taking a shit? Also legal, but try it on the pool table of your local tavern, and behold the annoyance.

What I'm wondering is if responsible gun owners are irritated at these lunatics who carry giant guns into a family restaurant and then act surprised that people respond with alarm. Seems they are. Seems that even Wayne LaPierre wants these assholes to stop acting like petulant children having a gun-fueled tantrum. So what happens now? Can we reach a consensus, or does it all just get crazier until we're literally shooting it out?

Story: When I went to Woodstock '94, the tenor was such that we could smoke pot out in the open and no one would do anything. Amazed, I raised my freak flag high and smoked as openly as I could. My friend pulled me aside and said "Wad," (people called me Wad then) "Just because you can smoke out in the open and announce every exhale, doesn't mean you have to." I looked around at all the families and random strangers, wondering if my friend was right. I didn't admit it immediately, being a dumbass 20-something. But he was. This rings the same way to me. Yeah, you can have your stupid gun. Do you really have to brandish it around in public rubbing everyone's nose in how little you care about their comfort and safety? Apparently so.

See, if you know someone has a fear of snakes and you throw a snake at them, you're an asshole. You can say it's a joke, or it's your right, or that it's legal, but you're still an inconsiderate, selfish, slightly sadistic asshole.
Don't be an asshole. Every single part of life is easier that way.

Have you heard? Racism is over! Hurrah!
I heard a while back that there was no more racism, because they changed the voting laws to make it easier to pass racist (anti)voting laws...which of course no one would pass, because there's no more racism.
Except...within hours of hearing that racism was over, a bunch of racists passed a bunch of racist bills to prove how unracist they are now that there's no more racism. Get it?

In my home state of Michigan, we learned recently that no matter what happens in the rest of the country, Michigan is racism free. That's why Affirmative Action is no longer needed at U of M, which must mean that college admissions are more or less evenly split among the races, or directly proportional to the racial makeup of the applicants. Wait, what? They aren't? Gosh...who could have ever foreseen that?
Except, you know, everyone.

I admit freely that I'm not 100% on Affirmative Action. I'm not sure counting and quotas is the best way to go about achieving social justice. Despite the douchebaggery of the speaker--I do think placing more focus on class than on race makes a lot of sense. Plenty of studies exist that show that the number 1 and 2 indicators of a child's educational success are the education of the mother, and poverty.
What is it about being underfed, getting poor nutrition, and having parents who are always tired, worried, stressed, or not home at all that keeps these kids from excelling in school? They must just be lazy, amirite? *eyeroll*

Moving on, The Internets are a great thing, because they get information to The People. Social networking has been a force for social change and even political upheaval. But see, the Internets also give a voice to the most hateful sort of paranoid dickbags. Sure, free speech means avoid the comments at all costs. It means that Nazi sympathizers, holocaust deniers, pedophiles, and Glade-huffers can find kindred spirits and know they aren't alone. Free speech means everybody gets to talk, even if ultimately we have to scour every news story for hints of satire--because gag news looks and sounds so much like the preposterous REAL news that it's hard to tell them apart. Hunger strikes against gay marriage, pro-slavery cattle ranchers, and anti-black-guy basketball profiteers sound like they should be made up.
They aren't.

So...we've got an internet where anyone can say anything, and any opinion no matter how destructive or horrible can be found and read by anyone who wants to find it. No type of legal consequences for willfully spreading lies, even with the express intent to cause anger, injury, whatevs. Amid all of that, we have the impending demise of Net Neutrality. I maintain that Net Neutrality is about a lot more than who'll get the fastest Netflix streaming.

Notice how the same half-dozen people own almost all the newspapers and TV networks? How long before those same assholes are controlling the entire internet? Cutting access to sites that check facts, point out lies, or present alternate points of view? What if FOX "news" loaded in seconds but CNN (or maybe a good news network) took 3 minutes. What if we had to pay extra to get BBC news or anything outside the US?

We like to pretend we're so awesome with our technology and our freedom. We aren't. Our crushing economy is well, crushing us. Many people are using all their energy just to keep their families fed and housed while others are amassing insane amounts of wealth on our backs.
I think it's awesome that rich people tried to buy Mitt Romney an election and weren't able to. But how long is that gonna last? Our current oligarchy is far worse than if we had elected a true despot. Even Kim Jong Un doesn't want his entire country to be 99% slaves to industries who continually fight for the right to not pay a living wage.

This Conservative Cabal is clearly plotting to slowly remove the laws that protect the weak and disenfranchised. They're doing their damndest to cut education and welfare so kids will grow up sick and stupid. They abhor family planning, and while they say they don't approve of working moms--they've cleverly arranged an economy where it's damn difficult to raise kids on a single salary--and it often means going without owning a home. The Conservative Cabal fights for the right to pay paltry wages while raking in billions in profits, all the while pretending that they hire workers based on what they can afford--rather than on what they need. Then they get angry and accusatory when someone is smart or brave, or fed-up enough to call them out on it.

*sigh*
Girl-H's (H's sister) food stamps were taken away this week. Budget cuts. She works part-time, but can't be on her feet for more than a few minutes due to an injury she can no longer afford to treat or medicate. Her ACA application was "lost" so she had no healthcare at present. We found all that out last night. I was saving up to take H to see Godzilla but now it looks like we're going to send that money to her so she can eat. Because 'Murica & Freedumz.

I'd be willing to bet my last $5 that the chick at Terminus is a cannibal--or possibly the leader of a cannibal cabal.
That's why she's inviting people to go there. That's why she was grilling meat when they arrived. That's why she's played by Denise Crosby--because as far as I know, she's only played one non-asshatted character ever.


In other news, I'll be really happy when people stop trying to get Stephen Colbert fired. If one tweet by someone who isn't even him as convinced you that he's nothing more than a hateful bigot who deserves to have his platform taken away, I daresay that you could stand to clean your loop a bit better before turning on your TV. And if you haven't even seen the episode, kindly STFU until you do. No uninformed opinions plz.

Yes, people have a right to be offended at things they don't like. When shit offends me I usually have plenty to say about it. Nobody is being "too sensitive," IMO, and people trying to silence this woman are being just as myopic as she is.
But--not only was the tweet a reference to earlier mocking of racial insensitivity, but it wasn't even written by SC himself. Sure, people have every right to be offended, even outraged, if that's what their misunderstanding of the situation leads them to believe. That doesn't make it true, or reflective of Colbert's intentions.
A few people have explained to me that intentions don't matter if people('s feelings) are being hurt. This is where you lose me. If everyone who uses a certain word is always a certain way--aren't George Carlin and Lenny Bruce also total racists who "don't care about the pain they inflict?" If intentions don't matter, why do people want hate crime laws. NOTE: I do not support hate crimes legislation--not because I think hate crime is awesome, but because I think we should punish people for their actions, not their thoughts.

Hurt feelings necessitate an apology, and perhaps further discussion that leads to greater understanding on both sides. Trying to silence those with whom you disagree--instead of making your case and engaging in fair discussion--is just pointless posturing, just competing to be the Decider.

Maybe we could entertain the idea that we don't necessarily have to get people fired every time they do or say something we don't like. I've worked enough fast food and customer service jobs to know first-hand how much people LOVE to get others fired or reprimanded for doing something they don't like--whether it's not giving away free food undeservedly, saying a word that makes us cringe, or the terrible crime of not smiling. Wanting swift and crippling revenge against people we disagree with is petty, malicious, and an ineffective way to manage hurt or bring about social change. Do we really think all of TV would be better without Stephen Colbert? I don't see how...