Zerlina Maxwell challenges rape culture on Fox News, receives rape threats on Twitter.
I’m still officially on my Man Boobz staycation, but I felt I needed to mention yet another example of a woman saying that men can stop rape … and getting rape threats in return.
Political analyst Zerlina Maxwell went on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News earlier this week and made the terrible mistake of suggesting to a hostile audience that men aren’t really doing any favors to women by telling them to arm themselves against rapists. Instead, as Salon notes, she said this:
“I don’t think that we should be telling women anything. I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there.” She told Hannity, “You’re talking about this as if it’s some faceless, nameless criminal, when a lot of times it’s someone you know and trust,” adding, “If you train men not to grow up to become rapists, you prevent rape.”
Indeed, increased rape awareness has contributed to a dramatic decrease in rape over the last thirty years.
But apparently a lot of men were shocked – shocked! – that a woman would suggest that their patronizing advice was less likely to prevent rape than rape prevention education aimed at the demographic group that is responsible for the overwhelmng majority of rapes. That is, men.
So, naturally, the angriest of these men decided they would show Maxwell just how wrong she was … by threatening her with rape on Twitter.
Here’s just one example:
Rape culture in action.
Maxwell’s supporters have stepped up to defend her and her remarks, and have started a hashtag — #TYZerlina — to continue the discussion. If you’re on Twitter, join in .
Here’s the Fox News segment in question featuring Maxwell:
Posted on March 8, 2013, in harassment, hate, irony alert, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, rape, rape culture and tagged #TYZerlina, fox news, rape culture, Zerlina Maxwell. Bookmark the permalink. 701 Comments.
This made me lol:
@ Marie & Kim
Roscoe has been here before. Read some of his previous comments and you’ll be even less keen on the idea of him “protecting” you.
Hey drst, this was great:
“You’re not wrong for wanting the people in your life to be safe. You’re wrong for demanding that women relax their vigilance, which they undertake for their own sanity and self-protection, because it hurts your feelings and disturbs your comfortable mental image of yourself as the valiant protector. Which makes your personal fee-fees more important than the feelings and actions of the women around you. If you can’t see how shitty that is, you should spend the rest of your life walking on LEGOS.”
On the topic of painful things that can be stepped on, remember those lamps with the long glass filaments that lighted up at the ends that were a thing in the 80s? We had one of those, until I managed to get multiple little pieces of glass that had broken off embedded in my foot (I was the only person in the family who walked around barefoot). My Dad pulled the pieces out with tweezers. It hurt worse than the time that I fell on a balance beam and landed (on the beam) right on the small of my back. I think feet are just really sensitive.
My immediate, very cynical, thought was that since society takes the rape of children more seriously than it takes the rape of adults (though still not seriously enough), it makes sense that the people who actually get caught and convicted for raping children would be of less than average intelligence. Unless we have corresponding data for pedophiles who’ve never been convicted I’m not sure that the data on those who are convicted tells us anything about intelligence in pedophiles, it may simply be telling us that smarter people are more able to avoid detection and/or game the criminal justice system more effectively.
Also, low IQ correlates with low socioeconomic status (and not in the way that conservatives think). Imagine joanimal’s pedophile doctor being in court, versus a guy who worked at a convenience store, or someone who was homeless. Which person do you think is more likely to be convicted?
This is why I’m not sure that particular data set tells us what it initially appears to be telling us.
LMAO at the one where the black and white cat swats the gray cat, so it turns around and attacks the orange cat.
Wow, the dude who was filmed talking at the Reddit panel at SXSW. The fact that one of the panelists is trying to ask a question? Who cares, just talk over her. The fact that you’re not the only person waiting for the mic? Who cares, you’re more important, they can wait.
It’s like watching Brandon or Diogenes in meatspace!
katz, that one had me LMAO too! Poor orange kitty – “What’d I do?” and black and white kitty sitting up there all innocent.
Some Gal if you’re around – we had more Cat Offensiveness just now. Went out to bring in washing, by the time I came back to the door it was blocked by Madam looking like she’d been lying there for hours.
@The Kittehs’
I got sleepy, but it is a cute story to wake up to. :) Our cat seems to have decided that the clock change means that she should try to wake us up even earlier so she’s been kicked out of the bedroom. I am waiting for her to realize I am awake because that is when the pitiful crying will start.
“I am waiting for her to realize I am awake because that is when the pitiful crying will start.”
You too? My mother’s cat must not have made that realization yet, or I’d have howling at my door — she’s not allowed in here unsupervised cuz someone can’t learn not to harass the fish (and currently I’ve got a DIY CO2 unit set up, I really don’t want that knocked over)
Oh and stepping on the nail wasn’t too bad actually, most annoying part was carefully pulling my sock off inside out so I could see it to remove it. I’d had a tetanus shot only a few months before, so it really was just a mild annoyance…either that or Legos hurt so bad that it seemed mild in comparison…
Nettles are the winner in my book, mostly because Legos are mad easy to remove, whereas those are more like hoping to a water source because every step makes your foot scream.
Regarding pedophile arrests and IQ, does anyone remember the study of the percent of male college students who’d admit to rape if the word rape wasn’t used (eg “I’ve had sex with a partner who was too drunk to walk” type questions). They’re college students, so IQ and SES were sort of controlled for by the privileges required to attend college at all, and that percent had to be higher than the conviction rate just based on the conviction rate being fucking abysmal. So after about 3 assumptions here, I’m guessing that yes, SES and thus IQ have an affect oh who ends up in jail for, really, most crimes, but particularly sexual ones, since again, the conviction rate is abysmal.
@poxy – dude, you said right there “I don’t know about this complex and difficult topic you guys are discussing.” I suggested that instead of saying that you should think “Hrm, I don’t know anything about this topic so maybe I should keep my mouth shut.” It’s not that hard.
@Argenti
The study I found tried to control for referral source (lawyer, parole, probation, etc. vs. other sources), but I can’t tell how decent a job they did on that because I don’t have access to the full article. Sometimes I really miss being a student. (Although, if it is a study that really interests me, and that I would likely use at some point, I still have my ways. Muahaha.)
I am sure that SES (and so, as you point out IQ) makes both arrest and conviction more likely.
“Although, if it is a study that really interests me, and that I would likely use at some point, I still have my ways. Muahaha.”
Muahaha indeed, the not-an-ex is a grad student ;)
Glad your study tried to control for referring course, I’d love to see it, but if the source looks good and the abstract says that, I can trust that it’s accurate enough. And assumptions aside, it seems logical that SES in particular would affect arrest and conviction rates. Not because people of lower SES commit more crime, but because people of SES can afford better lawyers if arrested, and that’s if it isn’t settled without an arrest record.
And fuck, even that ignores that an arrest record makes it harder to find a job, particularly a good one. But now I’m ranting about the failure that is the US justice system.
@Argenti
My source is a friend who married an academic librarian, so I am careful not to ask too much, but they’ve always been very nice when I have asked.
Here is the study. It’s the same one I posted for Marie. It sounds good, but that is half the point of an abstract. :)
Not only the better lawyer, but the prosecutors will likely be a bit biased in the direction of higher SES = better person. It would be hard for them not to be, particularly as they are less likely to come from low SES groups.
*sigh* the rest sounds good, but this? “phallometric testing” please just don’t — if nothing else, at least back it up with their reported preferences (which, at least for “prefers adults” should be a pretty high correlation between “person reports attraction” and “person’s penis goes up”)
Sorry, I find phallometric testing questionable at best. Especially without any other measure backing it up. Argh, *conflicted* part of why it’s questionable is that people can pretend to be viewing something else, eg when shown a young girl, picture a nun or something. But I’d imagine that skill is better formed in people testing at higher IQ — visual memory is one of the test factors.
Hot mess of intertwined variables right there. You want me to email a request for the full article? Ze’s at work currently, so idk how soon I could get it, but I can probably get it.
The points about access to lawyers and judge/cop bias stand though.
If you can’t get the article any other way, email me the cite and I’ll see what I can do. I’ll be offline for a while though. My email is my nym + gmail.
@Argenti
I find most of the ways of testing sexual orientation and preference pretty dicey. Is phallometric testing worse than most of those? Or maybe I should ask, do you think there is a good way?
Maybe there is something backing it up in the referral process?
Some Gal — eh…truly scientifically solid ways of testing preferences? Yeah, that’s pretty questionable in general. For less “you’re going to jail if you admit this” type preferences, self-reports are potentially best. Yeah there’s the usual issues with self-reporting, but trying to test if someone is “actually straight” is really questionable at face value. Due to the much larger benefit of lying about pedophilia, I’m less inclined to trust self-reports, but measuring genital activity is pretty questionable.
I’m hoping there’s something backing it up, but idk how that’d really work? Previous arrests for pedophilic crimes would at least confirm pedophilic tendencies, but couldn’t confirm a lack of such tendencies…lol, access to someone’s porn collection might be more definitive, but seems a bit hard to acquire!
Oh and obviously sexual orientation regarding your preferred adult partners is not the same as preferences for children. Ethical qualms aside though, the fundamental question in both cases is “wtf do you find attractive” — using “pedophilia is an orientation just like homosexuality” as an excuse to attempt to legalize it though? Someone cue Monty Pythn’s fish slapping dance, because that’s what I want to do everytime I hear that bullshit. /”oh fuck no” rant
@Argenti
I was thinking (hoping) they got at least some referrals through psychiatrists/therapists.
It is all about consent. There are similarities between the arguments for legalizing pedophilia because it is just an orientation and the guys whining about how women should sleep with them just because they are sexually attracted to women. Both seem to believe you have a right to the sex you prefer with the partner you prefer. You don’t. If you can find a willing, capable of consent partner, that’s great. Those partners just don’t exist for pedophiles. And if they don’t exist for a particular straight guy, he is out if luck too.
Exactly! GLBT/poly/kinky/whatever people can find consenting partners (well, some with more difficultly than others, I’m looking at you TERFs) — but it’s legally possible. Pedophiles just plain can’t, kids can’t consent, period.
I mean fuck, as I was saying the other days, minors can’t even consent to medical treatments without parental consent, which is part of the damned parental notification laws regarding abortion. But now I’m seriously digressing, and I have a date with a violin (that sounds questionable in this context huh? Scheduled meeting with my violin?)
that makes sense. I’m probably just going to be reading what everyone else here says about the topic, because it’s not something I know much about.
@Argenti Aertheri
Thanks for saying that, helped me clarify what squicked me out about the article, because the two are not the same. (I still don’t know if pedophilia is an orientation or not, but there’s the huge difference b/c of consenting adults idk I’m rambling. )
bleh, didn’t know that :( Seems like it’d have to be a case by case thing, especially since lots of the minors getting pregnant would be in their teens, which is kind of where I start going ‘they can decide for themselves. :/
Personally, I think that once you are old enough to expect privacy with a psychiatric professional, you are old enough to keep your sex life from your parents. All pressing medical decisions, at least regarding sex and reproduction and drug and alcohol use should not require a parent’s consent. So, that would put it at about 12-14. Seems right to me. For non-pressing decisions, 16-18 seems fine.
@Argenti
Have fun! (I would nirmally add “with your violin!” but there was, as far as I could see, no way of conveying that without innuendo.)
Me and my violin are still on speaking terms, it and my neck and fingers not so much (fingers say “why must up play scales that go up to the D above C6?!”)
Oh topic, yeah, I’d personally do all medical decisions based on competency to make them // understanding of the consequences. Which means different ages for different people, but if we’d stop assuming that even pregnant adults are unable to grasp abortion without ultrasounds and graphics and all that shit…yeah, assuming adults can make that decision would help in determining whether a minor can.
Pregnancy though? I’m of the school that if you’re old enough to get pregnant one of two things is true: you’re too young to have a child, either physically, mentally, or both, because you yourself are still a child; or you’re old enough to make your own damned medical decisions. Basically, either CPS should be involved, or you’re old enough to consent to sex, and thus abortion too.
This is, of course, in ideal land, where pregnant adults are assumed competent with regards to abortion, teens are judged on competency for all medical decisions, pre-teens are treated as children and CPS called if they’re pregnant. Because fuck, 12 is a goddamned child, biological able to get pregnant or not, the other party is usually an adult, which isn’t legal, and 12 is way too young to give birth safely. (That’s not personal option, child birth is just plain dangerous if under 15)
Over 15 is very probably competent to make medical decisions, under 15 is child birth is more dangerous…get a damned child advocate for the latter group?
Oh and sex ed, so that anyone old enough to get pregnancy does actually understand how that happens and how to prevent it (should I get out my gif? I think I should) — condoms!
Can you tell I get crisp about child abuse?
@Argenti Aertheri
oh, ew, somehow my brain wasn’t thinking about/remembering all the ultra sound stuff. :( ugh.
That’s a good way to put it, if they’re old enough to have birth safely, they’re probably old enough to decide for themselves :/
@nerdypants:
Yes and I am horrified, as who can not be.
But I don’t think arguments of desperate defense attorneys (or excuses by family members of perps, for that matter) are good evidence for societal beliefs.
11 is even a bit on the old side for a true pedophile.
I don’t really know what this has to do with sexual orientation. If pedophiles can’t be educated not to rape children, the same must be true for men, who for some reason are unable to get consensual sex with adult women.
Imho a lot of people can never be reached because they are simply evil. If someone (I don’t dare to say his name) is very educated about sexual violence and experienced the suffering of survivors at first-hand and still offends, gets convicted, gets SO treatment and still re-offends, there seems to be a biologically given barrier in what you can achieve. And that’s also the reason why I believe that evidence is important. Without it you may choose inefficient strategies that only limit people’s freedom.
Misogynistic jokes, stereotypes, anonymous rape threats, catcalling, harassment, victim blaming, etc etc should be combated because they are bad in their own right. But you have to admit that with children all of that is at least enormously reduced. And then you’ve got something like ‘Dreamboard’ = epitome of evil.
It may indeed be the case that getting rid of rape culture and sexism also makes those evils go away, that it’s indeed just a “power thing”. Maybe, yet it’s still just another assumption.
@Some Gal:
Still, there’s a difference between this whining and believing in some sort of natural right to have sex.
@drst:
“not the most informed” != “don’t know anything”. OK?
Can we just never use winky emoticons in discussions of child sexual abuse?
@Poxy
Nope. You don’t whine that women are in the wrong (morally and otherwise) when they behave as though they own their own bodies unless you believe that they don’t. Or wish they didn’t. Looks the same to me.
@Viscaria
I would have thought that was a given, but then you never know with the people who show up.
Way late in asking, but what does TERF stand for? I can’t find anything relevant via Google.
Trans-exclusionary radfems.
@Viscaria:
I cannot tell you how stupid I feel for that, and already expected that someone would call me out for that. It was completely unintentional, I missed it. I would’ve caught it if there was a preview function. I would’ve edited it, if that were possible.
@Poxy, I’m glad to hear it wasn’t intentional. I’m sure we’ve all made unfortunate typos.
Poxy, I went ahead and removed the emoticon from your comment.
Thanks for the explanation, Viscaria.
“I don’t really know what this has to do with sexual orientation. If pedophiles can’t be educated not to rape children, the same must be true for men, who for some reason are unable to get consensual sex with adult women.”
Are we doing this again? Because it looks like we’re doing this again. Anyone got a good citation for how rape is not thwarted by consensual sex / how the goal of rape is not just to get laid.
Considering the number of adults, gender moot, who think stranger jumps out of bushes = most rape, yeah, education has a point. How many of the “I had sex with someone too drunk to walk (but don’t say I raped anyone)” crowd actually realize that that’s rape and not just a way to “get what you having coming to you” or “show ‘em who’s boss” or whatever?
Goddamned that was one hell of a run-on sentence, sorry!
Viscaria — thanks for covering that explanation.
Not to mention that most rape is not only not stranger rape, it’s by people who are known to or intimates of the victim. Rapists are as likely to be in sexual relationships (with the victim or anyone else) as not – the idea that rape is committed by men who “can’t get sex” is simply wrong. It’s like the ideas about who child molesters are … contrary to myth, they’re mostly married men.
Rape is a deliberate crime of sexualised violence, not an expression of frustrated sexual desire.
Bloody hell, Poxy! You’re seriously positing that hetrosexual men rape women because “for some reason [they] are unable to get consensual sex with adult women” ?
Fuck off!
Are you fucking stupid? These people do not exist outside of society, you exquisite dipshit.
Kindly take titianblue’s and my invitation to fuck off.
@poxy: The reason that I brought up the case of the 11 year old was in response to your statement that, with child abuse, we don’t have to bother with stuff like ‘grey rape’, and that it’s utterly condemned by society. For children under the age of about 9 I’d agree with you, however in this case of the 11 year old, the defence attorney and many members of her community believed that she was at least partly responsible for what happened. My point being that, yes, we have come some way towards utter condemnation of child sex abuse, but we are not all the way there yet.
I’d disagree with you there. For starters, there were many in her community who believed that e.g. how she dressed was relevant (NY Times article and critique). Second, desperate as the attorney was (there was video evidence of the rapes), he is not going to make an argument that absolutely will not fly. Imagine for example that she had been a toddler instead; no attorney in their right mind would try what he did, no matter what the toddler said or how it “consented”. The fact that he tried it says that he thought here was some small chance that it might work.
This is true. I suppose the conversation got a bit confused because not all child sex abuse is committed by true paedophiles, and not all paedophiles abuse. I was responding to your comment about child sex abuse broadly, rather than just that committed by paedophiles.
Though you should see, in acknowledging the fact that these men are unlikely true pedophiles, you are also acknowledging that these men were not driven to do this by their orientation, which raises the possibility that this is something that can be educated out of them. (As an example of educating child sex abuse out of someone, I’d give Mestary from Najibullah Quraishi’s ‘The Dancing Boys of Afghanistan’).
There are a few assumptions embedded in that, probably the most dubious one being that ‘rapist’ is an unchangeable orientation like paedophilia is, and thus cannot be influenced by education and beliefs. I have seen no evidence that this is the case. Instead, I see evidence where the beliefs that communities hold about women and male authority lead to rape, to the point where the society might not even realise that a rape has occurred nor understand it to be a crime against that girl/woman. A few examples that spring to mind include the FLDS church, Old Testament law, rabbinical law re. children under 3, and Aisha the 9 year old wife of Muhammad. These things are fixable – it wasn’t that long ago that marital rape was called conjugal rights!
I think the fact that they thought it was acceptable to try says something. Presumably they’d’ve assumed it could work.
They’re awfully similar. If they don’t believe they have a right to it, why are they whining? (and ‘I’m sad I haven’t gotten laid in a while’ is different from ‘why won’t those bitches fuck me’)
I think it might be an evo psych theory, it appears in my copy of ‘Animal Behavior’ by John Alcock. I’ve only got the 7th edition though from 2001.
I should confess that I was working on the assumption that low IQ directly correlates with criminality, the reasoning being that a low IQ leads to poor decision-making ability, and criminality is a poor decision. But a bit of Googling suggests that it’s not that straightforward, so I’m backing down from that.
@nerdypants Doesn’t surprise me, Bullshit rape apology then as now.
@titianblue: I don’t know what the status of that theory is, but I don’t think that it is or is meant to be rape apologia. I want to quote you a bit from the book:
I suppose it is a bit like the paedophilia-as-an-orientation hypothesis. Saying that it might be an orientation is only an explanation for why certain people behave this way. It’s not saying that it is a good thing. The universe is a cold and indifferent place; many things that are so are not how we would want them to be.
It is quite different from paedophilia-as-an-orientation hypothesis. The one is saying you cannot control to whom you are attracted. The other is saying that you cannot control what you do about that attraction “because evolution”. I call bullshit!
@titianblue: There is nothing in the rape-as-adaptive-tactic hypothesis that says that it cannot be controlled, or that people are not accountable when they fail to do so. Even the true paedophile is held to account for their actions. The questions about why people do what they do, versus what we should do with them when they do, are in two separate spheres.
I was not aware that lawyers/families/the majority of the population of some towns where little girls are raped existed in some sort of magical space outside society. What a fascinating new discovery.
Poxy, you are simply not educated enough on this topic to have a useful, interesting conversation about it. Go do some reading and then come back.
(But only if you can restrain the urge to pepper your comments about child abuse with cutesy emoticons, because seriously, that was messed up.)
Thanks, David!
@titianblue:
No, I’m not. That should be some sort of reductio ad absurdum of nerdypants argument who claimed that it’s unsurprising that pedophiles offend. What you quote here is the absurd conclusion.
@hellkell:
I just said that they are not good evidence. Lawyers, if desperate, clutch at every straw they can get. I admit that they don’t try to blame black magic anymore, so you are right, they don’t exist completely outside of society.
But seriously, some of them are just comically unscrupulous. Topgun DUI? The Sandusky hygiene defense? Or if you take insurance lawyers, they’ll claim a person was already dead before the car crash.
@Marie:
Normative or should-statements and rights are very different. At least for most people. E.g libertarians would claim that you don’t have a right to be saved from starvation by your family, but that it’s ethically wrong that they let you you starve. Also, how is “I’m sad I haven’t gotten laid in a while” so different from “Why wont any woman fuck me? Boo-hoo.”?
First government in the world to codify rape in marriage as a crime: South Australia in 1976. Not that long ago at all.
This whole evo-psych claim skeeves me out because justifying rape is exactly how it’s used by rape apologists, “incels” and the like. “If bitches don’t fuck me I will be UNCONTROLLABLY DRIVEN to rape them” is the line of threat from more than just GGG.
Reading is fundamental, Poxy. Go do some before you show your ass in public again.
Poxy: “I don’t really know what this has to do with sexual orientation. If pedophiles can’t be educated not to rape children, the same must be true for men, who for some reason are unable to get consensual sex with adult women.”
titanblue: “Bloody hell, Poxy! You’re seriously positing that hetrosexual men rape women because “for some reason [they] are unable to get consensual sex with adult women” ?”
How the fuck is that reductio ad absurdum? No, seriously. You said, in exactly this wording, “men, who for some reason are unable to get consensual sex with adult women” — in the context of whether pedophiles can “be educated not to rape children”. It takes all of two brain cells knocking together to infer that you meant “men (who rape adults), who for some reason cannot get consensual sex with adult women”.
It isn’t anything like a leap of logic, and certainly not a reductio ad absurdum, to decide that you meant to imply that men rape women because they can’t get consensual sex. You basically said as much!
Which is ignoring the endless troupe about how, wait for it, men rape because they can’t get laid and have to get those desires filled somehow!
That’s why education seems like such a good idea to me. Sure, there are asshole rapists who would rape regardless and just won’t call it by that name because they don’t want to sound bad, but with all the misinformation that goes around about sex and consent (especially all the sources that say that women say “no” when they mean “yes”), I’m sure there are guys out there who honestly think they aren’t doing anything wrong and may honestly think that’s just how sex is: a guy pushing until a girl gives in.
@CassandraSays:
I don’t remember that I said that.
Could you be a bit more specific? What exactly makes you think that way?
Doesn’t it make a difference for you if your neighbor runs over your cat by accident or deliberately, Cassandra?
OK, I call troll. Go back to wherever it is that trolls live when they’re not pestering feminist blogs, little troll.
Cassandra, I admire your restraint in waiting this long to call troll.
I was hoping that zie would make it really super obvious for anyone who was lurking. Thanks for that comment about running over people’s cats, Poxy! That was nice and clear.
“Could you be a bit more specific? What exactly makes you think that way?”
Oh Cassandra the mighty detector of socks, didn’t we have nearly this exact line while Brz, NNY etc where being dumb and altogether too alike to distinguish? (Also, anyone find it odd we have two new “this smells of sock” cases right after they vanished?)
We have had a rush of “I have no point, I just want you to keep talking to me because I’m really lonely and irritating people on the internet is as close to frienship as I can get” trolls recently.
It’s ok, Cassandra & katz, I’m not angry about you. It’s a problem many people have, now I experienced it first hand.
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=425&start=25#p4115
Yes, honey, other trolls also get labeled as trolls. Run along now.
Yep. Sometimes I wonder if that kind of thing is some holdover from teleological thinking, or some mutant of theological concepts like Natural Law. But I’m probably over-thinking it; they’re probably just using it as a post-hoc rationalisation for their own shittiness.
No, good-faith poster get labeled as trolls. Read this post, katz.
@Argenti Aertheri:
I think Cassandra should reevaluate zir attitude about people who seek contact and yes, Just happen to Ask Questions.
Poxy, what the hell are you on about with that link? If you know the term JAQing off, then how about not doing it. And don’t come across all condescendingly “there, there” at the regulars, either.
FYI, this part of the discussion you linked to seems to point to your own developing behaviour here. I suspect it’s not the point you’re trying (?) to make.
fwiw, I’m still not calling troll on Poxy.
(When I think of some of the things I said when I was new to feminism, I cringe.)
*bangs head into wall* the difference is ever so simple — people honestly asking questions are willing to listen to the answers, is that really that hard?
Also, I’m stuck listening to my father complain about his father, he literally just said “oh god I’ve heard this before”…about something I’ve heard about a dozen times so far. To top this shit off, he’s moaning about how his father is just refusing to do things that he’s sure will be good for him…I have a special hatred for that currently, considering my last irate comment was while trying not to panic over my psych doing exactly that.
Someone come kidnap me, please. I make some mean coffee, strong but not bitter!
Poxy’s last comment really needed a “little missy” for full effect. 2/10 score from the British judge.