Blog PostsRec Me a Rom-Com

Two weeks ago, I talked about why I have such picky standards for the romantic comedy film genre. Last week, I talked about a romantic comedy movie I saw in the theaters and the way romance is presented in the TV show Community.

This weekend, an idea for a blog project was born.

Next year, I will watch no fewer than 52 romantic comedies – one for each week of the year – and review every single one on this blog.

Here’s the truth of the matter. I love romantic comedies (when they’re good. When they stink, the rom-com is my least favorite genre.) I also think that looking at romantic comedies is a worthwhile feminist project. I want to look at how men and women are represented in these films. I want to look at the way romantic expectations are presented in our popular culture. I want to look at issues of consent. I want to look at the way the comedy genre affects the romance genre and vice-versa.

I also want recommendations.

In the comments – or in an email to the.funny.feminist@gmail.com – please recommend every single romantic comedy you can think of that you would like me to review on this blog.

I mean anything. You can ask me to review your favorite romantic comedy of all time. You can ask me to review a romantic comedy that you hated and hope that I will rip to shreds. You can ask me to review a romantic comedy that you have never seen but were curious about watching.

You can be diverse in your recommendations, too. Suggest modern movies and old classics. Tell me to watch romantic comedies about high school students, twenty-somethings, middle-aged people, and retirees. Recommend me heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and polyamorous romantic comedies. Characters should come from a variety of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

I’m not picky. Tell me to watch anything. I have only one criterion: the movie has to be comedic in nature and have a romance at the center of the plot.

You can also leave me as many suggestions as you want. I won’t even mind if you suggest something that I have already seen. I’ll just watch it again and review it here.

I challenge thee, readers. Rec me a rom-com.

ETA: I have received the following film suggestions – Love Actually, 50 First Dates, 13 Going on 30, Clueless, Show Me Love (aka Fucking Amal), Together, Mansfield Park, Go Fish, Bedrooms and Hallways, Something New, Definitely Maybe, Kate and Leopold, The Princess Bride, Sleepless in Seattle, Eat Pray Love, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, 10 Things I Hate About You, 27 Dresses, Elizabethtown, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Hitch, Knocked Up, Chasing Amy, (500) Days of Summer, Pretty Woman, Love and Basketball, Amelie, Bridget Jones’ Diary, High Fidelity, The Real Blonde, The Unbelievable Truth, Trust, Simple Men, The Thin Man, Topper, Miami Rhapsody, Party Girl, Kicking and Screaming, Secretary, Stranger than Fiction, His Girl Friday, It Happened One Night,The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby, Some Like it Hot, What’s Up Doc?, Sabrina, The Apartment. I’ve seen half of these, but would be willing to give them a second look for blogging purposes. There’s a decent variety in here so far. If anyone has suggestions of older black-and-white romantic comedies, or rom-coms starring older characters, those would be greatly appreciated.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged | 30 Comments

Blog PostsHelp! It’s the Thought Police!

Here are a few (paraphrased) Facebook status updates I’ve had to see on my news feed over the last few months:

“Why are you all complaining about Amy Winehouse’s death when a lot of people died in Norway? We only care about drug addicts but not innocent people?”

“Quit complaining about the change in the Facebook news feed. There are other REAL problems in this world!”

“Steve Jobs died and everyone’s sad but does anyone care about Fred Shuttlesworth?!”

I see that people put a lot of thought and emotion into these updates, but I’d like to offer a catch-all, stock status update to use whenever people feel outraged about how others use their social media platforms:

“I am a better person than the rest of you because of what I choose to write about in my Facebook status updates.”

Feel free to copy and paste that status any time you want. It’s so much easier than furiously typing different judgmental status updates about other people’s choices.

Yeah, the sanctimonious nature of these status updates annoy me. A LOT.

Why?

1. It’s the tone, stupid. I hesitate to criticize people’s “tone” when they write about important issues because criticizing tone is a classic antifeminist silencing technique: “I care about this issue too, but your tone is too strident, and you being an angry woman is just damaging your cause.” But you know what, I’m criticizing tone anyway because I think my particular gripe is different.

The other day, I posted a link on my Facebook wall about Domestic Violence Awareness Month. I wrote, “In addition to October being Breast Cancer Awareness Month, it’s also Domestic Violence Awareness Month. This article is a really good read.” I suppose I could have written, “While all of you are planning your frivolous Halloween costumes, you SHOULD be talking about domestic violence and breast cancer,” but it’s funny – I thought that posting a judgmental accusation might turn people away from the message I was trying to send, rather than inviting them to read about an important issue.

2. We’re not always as informed as we think we are. I was moved, but not shocked, by Amy Winehouse’s death. I let out a gasp of surprise and held my hand to my chest when I read about Steve Jobs. I didn’t know who Fred Shuttlesworth was until I read about him on Shakesville and then thought, “Huh, he was an important activist. I’m going to read more about his accomplishments now.”

Clearly, I am a shallow, vain person who clearly cares more about entertainers and tech wizards than I do about important civil rights activists. Or maybe I knew more about Amy Winehouse and Steve Jobs because our media often intentionally uses entertainment to distract us from more complex social problems.

Or, alternately, one thing that Amy Winehouse, Steve Jobs, and Fred Shuttlesworth have in common is that they are all (Greendale) Human Beings who had lives and relationships worth honoring, and it seems supremely tacky to decide whose deaths “deserve” the most attention.

3. People grieve in different ways and for different reasons. Already, I’m seeing articles pop up all over the place talking about how Steve Jobs wasn’t God, and how people who are mourning him as though they lost their own family member are stupid.

Now, I understand this criticism to a point. Sometimes people are eulogized or turned into heroes when they die, and that’s not right. People deserve to be remembered for their positive traits and their flaws. Sanctifying the dead doesn’t do us any good.

However, Derek Jacobi may be “just” an actor and I have never met him personally, but I promise you that I will be a complete wreck when he dies. His performances have moved me deeply and I will ache whenever he passes. That doesn’t mean I think he’s a saint.

And while I understand the need to “not make someone else’s death all about you,” whenever I saw a snarky comment about people overreacting about Steve Jobs, it took all the self-control in my body not to furiously type, “The man died fucking YESTERDAY! When people who didn’t know him personally are still lighting candles and crying after a week, then we’ll talk.”

4. Not everyone has a direct brain-to-status-update link. Just because someone isn’t writing about the Norway deaths, or Occupy Wall Street, or cancer or AIDS or Imminent Death Syndrome doesn’t mean s/he doesn’t care about the cause. It just means s/he isn’t writing about it on Facebook.

That brings me to my final point.

5. For crap’s sake, it’s Facebook. If we can’t use our status updates to write about petty problems that get on our nerves, what can we use it for? Are we really going to judge moral character on what we write on a shallow, time-sucking social networking site?

If we are, then I am in deep trouble, y’all. At least half of my status updates involve fangirling Darren Criss or writing quotes from The Simpsons and A Very Potter Musical. I do post links about important social issues, too, but I don’t know if that’s enough to get me into Heaven! *frets*

Granted, you might be annoyed by other people’s status updates. That’s perfectly legitimate. My solution to that problem? Don’t read it. Ignore it. Or challenge the idea and start a conversation. But don’t tell people what they should or should not write about. It’s so patronizing.

And speaking of The Simpsons, I’ll wrap this up by paraphrasing Sideshow Bob: “By the way, I’m aware of the irony of being self-righteous about other people’s self-righteousness, so there’s no need to point it out.”

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged | 1 Comment

Blog PostsOctober Movies I Won’t be Seeing (And a Few I Might), Part One

October is my favorite month of the year. I love Halloween, I love the look and smell of autumn, and I especially love my birthday (three days ago. You can send my presents through FedEx.) I also love the beginning of Advent – not the Advent we associate with Christmas, but the Advent we associate with Oscar Season, where the producers slowly begin to release the movies that will win them the most awards, while occasionally sticking us with teenybopper fare to remind us that they still care about making money in the short-term.

In fact, so many movies are released in Oscar Season Advent that simply one movie trailer post won’t be enough. This is only the beginning of movies I won’t (and might) see in the month of October 2011.

Let’s start with The Ides of March, starring an All-Star Cast of Important Actors – some of whom are even women!

Summary: Ryan Gosling is an idealistic political aide to Actor George Clooney in a film made by Director George Clooney. You can tell he’s idealistic because he says things like, “Nothing bad happens when you’re doing the right thing.” (This movie is also starring Irony.) On the campaign trail, Ryan Gosling runs into Character Actors Paul Giammati and Philip Seymour Hoffman, but they’re both Important Character Actors who happen to be on opposite sides of the political debate – how will he choose which one to believe in?! But woe, Ryan Gosling also learns that Actor George Clooney is – pause for dramatic effect – not the man he thought he was. Political drama ensues. He also meets Marisa Tomei along the way, who you can tell is playing a dramatic role because her hair is messed up and she’s wearing glasses.

Predicted ending: Ryan Gosling is conflicted. Ryan Gosling makes important decisions. Ryan Gosling betrays people in the pursuit of ideals. Ryan Gosling walks down a lot of hallways.

My verdict: I will probably see this movie, because, well, Ryan Gosling, but I also like George Clooney as a director. I’m not as fond of George Clooney as an actor, but from this trailer, he looks like he’s giving a more restrained, less cocky performance than he usually gives. I am amused, though, by the number of trailers I’ve seen already that showcase Ryan Gosling walking down a lot of hallways, looking serious. And the woman tying his tie in the trailer is not only not Kristen Stewart with blonde hair, but she’s also not Theresa Palmer, the actress I thought was Kristen Stewart with blonde hair in Take Me Home Tonight. That’s Evan Rachel Wood. Wow.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | 6 Comments

Reviews‘What’s Your Number?’ and the Question of Boundaries

I spend a fair amount of my blogging time analyzing movies that, on the surface, don’t merit deep analysis. I write more blog posts about absurd comedies and romantic comedies than…well, just about anything else.

Why? What’s the point of writing about a fluffy romantic comedy that isn’t meant to be taken that seriously? Why am I not spending more time writing about more intellectual comedies, or finally watching Slings and Arrows when my dad has been recommending that to me for-approximately-ever?

I thought about this issue when I went to see What’s Your Number? last night, a movie that I featured on my “September Movies I Won’t be Seeing” post. (I originally claimed that I had no intention of seeing that movie unless a friend suggested we go see it, but it’s time for me to ‘fess up: I always planned on seeing that movie because of my Anna Faris appreciation, and was just hoping for someone else to suggest it so I could claim to be dragged into it when I wrote the blog post about it.) What’s Your Number? is a stereotypical, fluffy rom-com meant as nothing more than lighthearted entertainment, so why am I going to analyze it? What’s the point?

In some ways, I think that looking at this supposed light-hearted fare is even more valuable than looking closely at more intellectual works. The unintended messages of works of art can tell us even more about our culture and its values than the author’s intended meaning. Stephenie Meyer thinks she wrote a beautiful love story in Twilight, and what does it say about our culture that Edward Cullen’s stalking of Bella Swan is meant to be beautiful and loving instead of possessive and creepy?

Bringing up Twilight is apt when talking about What’s Your Number? since a huge plot point of that movie deals with Anna Faris’s character tracking down her ex-boyfriends – an act that some might consider stalking.

At the end of What’s Your Number?, I had a few thoughts about this movie:

1. “We would never see a movie about a man worrying about his number of sexual partners – unless he was worried about his number being too low.”

2. “Anna Faris’s act of tracking down her ex-boyfriends is portrayed as wrong and immature. If a man were the one trying to track down his ex-girlfriend, it would probably be portrayed as romantic.”

3. “Despite the way the movie treats boundary-crossing as funny, there still manages to be a lovely moment where consent is respected – and it’s rather sweet.”

The first two points are probably completely unsurprising to anyone who’s done any basic reading about feminism, but the third point will probably raise a few eyebrows.

Let me explain. Continue reading

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Blog PostsRomantic Comedies Aren’t Terrible (Except for When They Are)

Bitch Flicks hosted an interesting article about the romantic comedy genre just yesterday. The original post can be found here and the Bitch Flicks link can be found here. In the article “Rom-Coms Don’t Suck,” writer Amanda Krauss defends the romantic comedy genre against the tired criticism that it’s too “predictable”:

“Romantic comedies have existed for literally thousands of years; the same historical genre, comoedia, is also responsible for today’s sitcoms. But romantic comedies, especially, have suffered a great deal in the last few decades. These supposed “chick” flicks (male-authored for millennia, and still mostly male-created) get ridiculously low scores on MetaCritic and Rotten Tomatoes. Meanwhile, most “guy” comedies (e.g. an Apatow joint) or action flicks get decent scores, seemingly without even trying. This is pure and simple sexism. You sure as hell can’t defend action flicks on aesthetic grounds. And any reviewer who accuses a rom-com of being predictable should have their license revoked — of course it’s predictable. So was that action flick, by the way. Oh, didn’t you see it coming that the hero dude was going to save the world? I did.”

The article is spot-on and I agree with its major points. I hate the idea that romantic comedies are considered “girly” by default. Describing romantic comedies, or the romantic subplots in other movies, as “girly” is dismissive on two different levels. It turns “girly” into an insult, for one thing, but it also implies that romantic love and the desire to express romantic love is an emotion reserved for women. Krauss is entirely right that there’s really no difference between a typical action movie and a typical romantic comedy. In the first, the hero (usually a guy) will probably defuse the bomb just in time, and in the second, the leads are going to get together. They’re both formulaic, so why should one genre get a free pass for its predictability and the other criticized for it?

 

At the same time, even as I write this, I know that an action movie with a formulaic plot will still hold my attention and leave me relatively entertained, while an overly formulaic romantic comedy will leave me irritated and bored.

 

Why the double standard? Is there something else at work here in addition to sexism?

 

In a word: yes.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged | 1 Comment

Blog PostsThe Problem with Barney Stinson

I watched the first two episodes of the new season of How I Met Your Mother last week. I liked both episodes quite a bit. They felt like vintage How I Met Your Mother with good chemistry among the cast members and a lot of amusing cut-aways and skipping of time. I feel mostly positive about the direction the show is taking after a mostly wretched fifth season and a sixth season that was an improvement, but still lackluster.

However, I still have a problem with Barney Stinson.

Barney is a character who’s been bugging me for awhile now. I tried to ignore that bug because he’s played by Neil Patrick Harris and NPH is simply delightful on this show. He wasn’t the reason I started watching the show in the first place – that would be Jason Segel, for my love for Freaks and Geeks runs deep – but he is the one who kept me watching. Barney did so many wacky things, and that’s what made him fun! Barney’s the best, isn’t he?

Well, after six seasons, I’m no longer thinking that he’s the best. In fact, Barney Stinson is kind of a feminist’s nightmare. Continue reading

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | 9 Comments

Blog PostsMy Opinions Are Mine

I was thinking the other day about how I routinely mock movie trailers that I think look stupid, rip apart television shows that I find sexist or just plain bad, and how those posts sometimes attract trolls.

The trolls amuse me so much because they don’t see the inherent irony in posting rants on my blog about how I “take things too seriously” or need to “lighten up.” They think I’m the one taking things too seriously when they are just plain hurt, hurt, that I dislike things that they enjoy.

But when I reread that last post I wrote about the troll droppings, I wondered if people other than trolls are offended by what I write. I wonder if people read a post where I tear into Game of Thrones and think, “Damn, I feel stupid. I liked that episode.”

Now, I’m not vain enough to think that I’m so powerful that I SHAME THE WORLD into sharing my opinions or second-guessing their own, but on the off chance that I have made people think that I doubt their intelligence by enjoying something I don’t, trust me – that is not my intent.

My opinions are mine. By sharing my ideas, I hope to provoke thought, discussion, and reconsideration, because I think we could all stand to examine our opinions and why we hold them. That doesn’t mean I negatively judge people who disagree with me.

I think The Help has racist elements to it. I do not think this means that people who enjoy The Help are racist. If I did, I would be a big stinking hypocrite because Gone With the Wind is one of my favorite movies. That movie is twice as racist as The Help. I love it anyway because of the cinematography, costumes, score, and Vivien Leigh giving one of the best performances I’ve ever seen on film. That doesn’t mean I ignore its blatant racism or refuse to acknowledge it. I just love the film in spite of those things.

Liking art that has problematic elements doesn’t make you a bad person. I just think it’s important that we acknowledge those problematic elements rather than ignoring them.

There’s also a little thing called intersectionality that I think about when analyzing the art I enjoy. A text can be awesome in one respect and problematic in another. I think Glee‘s focus on teen LGBT issues is wonderful, but the show is made of major FAIL when it comes to its representation of female characters. The Vampire Diaries has some of the strongest female characters I’ve seen on TV, but I don’t like the fact that being a black person not named Bonnie in Mystic Falls is equivalent to walking around with a target on your back. Game of Thrones has wonderful female characters but they could rename the program Game of Boobs and Rape and no one would blink an eye.

Disagreeing with me won’t earn you my disrespect. Writing trollish comments on my blog and acting SUPER HURT that I don’t like something you like, as though criticizing a television show or film is equivalent to kicking your puppy, will earn you my eternal disdain, though I will be grateful to you for giving me a good laugh.

For those of you who aren’t trolls, though, and just read my blog regularly or from time to time – I don’t think any less of you if you like something I don’t. That’s not how I roll. We all have different reasons for liking things that we like. Sometimes I will hate a story that I can objectively tell is well-written and just not my cup of tea, and sometimes I will enjoy things that I know are bad but something about it just speaks to me on a personal level.

I judge the text. I don’t judge your reaction to the text.

People, I own the Spice Girls Greatest Hits album. I am in no place to judge your taste.

Posted in Blog Posts | 5 Comments

Blog PostsOn Reclaiming “Bitch”

I wrote a post a long time ago about gendered insults and how we should avoid them. I stand by the opinion that it’s demeaning to insult a person based on sex and/or gender, and I’ve tried to adapt my normal language patterns. For the most part, I’ve taken to calling people “assholes” when I don’t like them, making the behavior, rather the person, the subject of my contempt.

That said, I still use the word “bitch” and the adjective “bitchy” much of the time…only now, I’m using them as compliments. I’ve used the word “bitch” as a compliment before, but now I (try to) use the word exclusively as a compliment.

Why do I do this? Isn’t calling women “bitches,” even in a complimentary way, just endangering the feminist cause? Isn’t it the equivalent to black people calling each other the “n-word?”

I’ll answer the second question first, since this question invariably comes up during these kinds of debates, and just say that I don’t feel qualified to judge whether or not black people should call each other the n-word, and I won’t feel qualified to make a judgment about that issue until I live my life as a black person…in other words, never. So we’re not going to talk about that here.

As for the “endangering the cause” issue…well, I have thoughts about that.

Why are women called bitches? They usually get pegged with that insult and get compared to a female dog because they have the audacity to speak their mind and break free of the social norms. These women have stepped outside of their place, see, and they have to be punished for it by being called bitches.

Well, I happen to like women who speak their mind and break free of the social norms. In my world, a bitch is a woman who knows the risks she’s taking when she states an opinion and stands up for herself, but does it anyway because fuck all if she’s going to let some asshole tell her what she can and can’t do.

Trust me that if I call you a “straight-up bitch,” I mean that in the absolute best way.

Of course, not everyone is going to agree with me on this, and that’s fine. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. I also won’t admiringly call a woman a “straight-up bitch” or a “tough as nails bitch” if I think that will make her uncomfortable. I think all individuals have a right to be called whatever they want to be called. In general, though, I want to give general rounds of applause to the tough bitches in this world.

To continue to celebrate people who tell it like it is, I’m presenting some pictures of my favorite bitch faces. When I’m confronted with stupid jerks and assholes in real life, I wish I were a brave enough bitch to tell them like it is. Unfortunately, my sense of decorum usually trumps my desire to tell someone off and I swallow my bitchy comment and smile. These people, however? They don’t care if people think they’re bitches. They don’t have to even tell someone off because their marvelous bitch faces express their contempt better than words ever can.

In honor of the bitch face, I present you Santana Lopez

"You're singing Sweet Caroline to Rachel? Her?"

Lucille Bluth

"I can make five bitch faces in three seconds. Now give me a drink."

Hermione Granger

"Seriously, Ron. Shut the fuck up. Haven't you figured out yet that I'm always right?"

Kristen Stewart

"Yeah, no, not gonna shower if I don't want to."

Katherine Pierce

"I cannot BELIEVE I stalked your sorry ass for a hundred and fifty years."

Kurt Hummel

"Yes, I SHOULD win an Emmy for my ability to make these facial expressions alone."

Zahara Jolie-Pitt

"I'm, like, three, and I can still tell you're full of shit."

….Scarlett O’Hara

"You think you have it in you to be as fabulous as I am. You are wrong."

…and finally, my favorite bitch face of all time, from Tai Frasier:


That was way harsh, Tai. But let’s face it – Cher totally deserved it.

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged | 5 Comments

Reviews‘Crazy, Stupid, Love’ and Grand Romantic Gestures

I’ve written before about my conflicting feelings about grand romantic gestures. A part of me thinks they’re, well, romantic. I get swept up in the narrative of people publicly declaring their love for others. The other part of me thinks they’re creepy and invasive and I feel sorry for the person at the receiving end of the grand romantic gesture. We all swoon when we see a man surprise-propose to a woman in front of a crowd, but we don’t always consider what it’s like to be the woman who might not want to say yes (or wants to say yes, but not in front of a crowd), and yet there’s no way for the woman to exit the scene gracefully without looking like a Grade-A Asshole for stomping on some guy’s heart.

Crazy, Stupid, Love is a movie that strongly believes in the power of the Grand Romantic Gesture and True Love and Not Giving Up. As such, the film left me with several conflicting feelings. In fact, one storyline straight-up bothered me on a feminist level…and I still loved the movie. Like, draw-cartoon-hearts-and-smiley-faces-around-the-poster loved it.

Confused? So am I. Continue reading

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | 6 Comments

Blog PostsTROLLLL! In the Dungeon!!!

This post is brought to you by Professor Quirrell:

I haven’t had too many trolls stop by here for awhile. I think the troll repellent I sprayed around my corner of The Internet must be working. Every once in awhile, though, a troll manages to squeeze through and spread hir droppings all over the place. The one I got this morning was a true work of beauty, so exquisite in its trolliness that it deserves its own exhibit in the Troll Museum.

I’ve talked before about the Embittered Troll, the Comedian Troll, and the Ironic Troll. The one I got this morning managed to exhibit qualities of all three of these species of troll and show some strains of a fourth type of troll: the Verbose Troll. See, this troll didn’t condense his bile into one soundbite or punchline. He kindly went on to yell at me for five paragraphs.

And what kind of blogger would I be if I didn’t post this gem in its entirety? This troll is brought to you by none other than a gentleman *cough* who calls himself Khal Drogo, and he left a comment on my Game of Tits post.

Paragraph 1:

“It’s amazing how this discussion has gone on for so long without anyone actually clarifying the situation with Dany and Khal Drogo. In the book, the first ”physical examination” was indeed tender and sweet as Khal Drogo seemed to feel sorry for Dany and tried to comfort her. If one reads on however, he (or she…feminists…) reads that the first sexual intercourses with the Khal in the tent are brutal, degrading and painful. Martin even writes that Dany is grateful that she can smother her cries of pain in a pillow. So actually, the series does not change a thing. So take that!”

I love the whole “he (or she…feminists…)” aside in the middle of the paragraph. I can so picture him shaking his head while saying, “feminists,” and tsk-tsking over us silly people who can’t understand fantasy and sci-fi because we’re too confused by our ladybrains. But that’s not even my favorite part of the paragraph. It’s the discussion of the Dany/Drogo sex scene that was turned into a rape scene for the show, and he is oh-so intelligently pointing out that future relations between Dany and Drogo had all sorts of problematic connotations.

Actually, he has a point there. The Dany/Drogo relationship is problematic at best. Why, oh why, has this discussion gone on so long before he stepped in with his SMARTNESS to clarify the situation for us?

Except, you know, for the fact that someone already did, on April 19:

“Rape should never be titillating and I agree that the Dany scene was grotesque. I actually went back to reread it. If you recall, while she is turned on by the foreplay, the actual sex is rough enough on her 13 year old body to make her fear it every time he comes for her after that. So, Martin had no reason to make it any more violent.”

Oh. Oops?

Well, I shouldn’t be too hard on the guy, right? After all, his point is still a valid one. Just because he presented it in a way that managed to be both condescending and extremely childish (the “so take that!” just slays me), and just because he wanted to rush to prove how intelligent he was without bothering to actually read the comments, doesn’t mean he’s a total doofus. He made one good point in there, so shouldn’t I cut him some slack?

No-can-dosville, baby doll. No-can-do…sville. We still have four paragraphs to go. Continue reading

Posted in Blog Posts | Tagged , | 11 Comments