Kromm

On the subject of John Oliver, don't forget that the character Chiijohn basically IS a fetish/furry version of John himself (even if John won't admit it). A concept which OVERALL definitely confuses John... I'm sure there's been Chiijohn fanfic, even before John and his team basically wrote some (albeit a clean version) for that segment above.

One of the worst humans ever. But apparently great at avoiding consequences. A horrible person, but another who keeps failing upward to better circumstances each time.

That's kind of what I meant with Demi. Does it hurt any of us to honor a request to identify however they want? Not really. Do I truly believe either of them have fully considered what it means and aren't just hopping aboard a train that serves them for the time being? Also not really.

I'm generally progressive, but even so am sometimes wary of declarations like this. I mean Demi Lovato is entitled to identify in any way desired. Nothing to do with me. But this is someone who observationally has very much, in a pretty definitive way, seemed to strongly embrace a specific gender until very very recently (and recently, a new haircut was the main sign of any change). So this is quite an about-face. It does nothing to me except slightly confuse me though, so... okay. No biggie. I hope Demi is happy.

The Telegraph cracks me up with how consistently awful they are about everything. I'm certainly not YouTube subscribed to them, but the algorithm aggressively pushes their content, especially their Community posts... They're consistently outrageous opinions labeled as news. For example, on Joe Rogan seeing some well deserved and long overdue consequences for his stupid opinions, today they posted...

I like Sara, and it's inherently funny that MeAgain contradicts her no matter what, but when so many women complain that their companies don't properly or fairly account for having young children, she's gotta form and explain her thought here a liitle better where almost the opposite conclusion could be drawn. If she simply means she thinks she's getting shit assignments, that's something, but the word "treated" is pretty vague. People love seeing her humiliated? Meghan had a father?

Yeah, it's the same kind of damaging vast oversimplification as screaming "Zionists!". There are reasonable people in that community, they just have no control. Part of that is the Israeli's fault, and part that Hamas flushes any good faith efforts of the community as a whole right down the toilet each time.

Duh. I forgot that.

First... lucky Fred Savage for still making money off this. (never mind the second part!)

I didn't see the whole episode, but just based on the clip of the Matt Gaetz discussion, unbelievably this is going to be one of those rare times I don't think Meghan was as bad as most people reacting are saying. Again, there may have been other parts of the show where she ramped the nonsense up. But she's right she knows what's on the minds of Capitol Hill Republicans better than the others. She's probably right that the staffers don't like it. And as funny, and ultimately deserved as it was in the long term, Joy definitely was just baiting her with the "what do we call them?" shtick. I never feel bad for Meghan, and this is no exception. But she's been FAR more ridiculous than this on other days.

I won't disagree on Netanyahu. The man belongs in front of a firing squad. Again, I'm wary because of how I'm seeing "Zionist" tossed around. It's become a "no compromise, no peace" kind of declaration. Call Netanyahu and his supporters what they are instead: criminals and lunatics. It's an important distinction if someone actually wants peace in a post-Netanyahu Israel. Immediately. But they won't.

Google just told me he's now dating that girl from Bridgerton. Somehow meeting her in the middle of a Pandemic. And somewhere in there, Cindy Crawford's daughter (who a picture shows is pretty much a younger doppelganger of her Supermodel mother). So along with Ariana, I guess we can conclude he's definitely got game.

That's a bit of fake tan there, but I'm glad she didn't overdo it TOO much.

A healthy attitude! See the "Stan Culture" topic for the reverse...

Maybe Karens should be called Meghans. After all, Ms. Goldberg is technically a Karen (even if it's spelled differently).

Melber is sharp in a lot of ways, and he can love what he loves, but does indeed come off like a total moron returning to the well constantly of quoting hip hop and rap.

Netanyahu is human garbage, but I'm always wary of how this story is covered. It goes both ways. People are terrified to criticize the Israeli government, but on the other hand that distinction (that it's THE GOVERNMENT) also seems to get easily lost. I've seen the phrase "Zionist" casually tossed around more in the past few days than in the past few years, and more in the past few years than in decades before that. The truth is pressure needs to be applied that helps get Netanyahu tossed out of office. But it's a dangerous tightrope to navigate, because increasingly people commenting on it inevitably seem to be leaning towards oversimplifying the situation to Netanyahu bad. Israel bad. Zionists. Jews bad. Like there aren't shades in between. Of course, for decades it's been the equally unfair Terrorists bad. Middle East bad. Muslims bad. Palestinians bad. If you talk to people who actually live in Israel, the non hardliners I mean, they don't all feel that way. Certainly I know a lot of American Jews who don't, but a slimeball halfway across the world like Netanyahu rides roughshod over things and creates a scenario where they increasingly have to consider calling out a nation loosely associated with them inherently.

Interesting we circled around to Ariana Grande in a topic that discussed who might possibly find Pete Davidson attractive...

Minnie Mouse?

Her colleagues should tweet "it's not good to have Meghan back in the studio". Or the still remote ones "it's good to not be in the studio now". The crew in the studio can only be frustrated or pissed off in silence (at least publicly).

I might even do so if he said something really regressive, racist, sexist, etc. (outside of a clear joke where it actually was social commentary) and didn't follow that up with a good explanation or apology. But that's different from judging his marriage, or even his drug use. Now if his wife makes some kind of abuse complaints, that would also be totally different. But so far all she's done is made sure we know she wanted to keep the marriage intact and John didn't.

An amazingly rational statement!

This is an important distinction to me. I mean break it down... John Mulaney... ... Is an addict: unfortunate, but we all know that's a very complicated situation, especially to judge from the outside. ... Is getting divorced and is quickly with another woman: the worst possible interpretation of this (based on a lot of speculation) seems to be immoral, but nothing illegal. But even on the immorality scale, it's nothing that millions of people aren't doing in their own lives routinely. He's not Bill Cosby. He's not Harvey Weinstein. Heck, I'd even argue he's not even Rick Schroeder. I'll be slightly wary of Mulaney in future endeavors, but personally don't ride my horse high enough, so to speak, to feel qualified to judge him.

"Going to" is different from "they want to". Tommy Boy has allegedly been trying to get to her through Oprah. This article lays it out, but is skeptical: https://www.gossipcop.com/tom-cruise-recruiting-meghan-markle-into-scientology/180333/ I can't say I get it (or totally believe this) given that Oprah is the one who had to deal with Tom bouncing like a crazy person on her show's couch. You'd have thought that would have made her skeptical. Then again, a good part of her career has been supporting quacks (Dr. Phil, Dr. Oz, and others). Also, let's not forget that Harry and Meghan's entire emphasis on mental health through professional therapy is inimical to Scientology. That would make them enemies more than anything else.

Also fake. I mean this whole thing with him returning his Golden Globes "in protest" was nothing but a P. R. strategy. Someone who's spent decades with his every need attended to by unpaid or badly paid workers (aka "slave labor") doesn't actually care about social issues.