As much as I'm a fan of anal sex, I can't condone it here because I detest controlling female sexuality. You gotta ring Satan's doorbell hard or keep your pants on.
Push the button!

I thought you were going to say "anally"...that's the old fashioned way..

You seem to be offended that Ulysses spoke up that he didn't find her funny, and have taken it to the nth degree (really, analogies re: anal fisting?), but a big part of Amy's speech/performance was the idea that she has always been a bit unique and saw no reason to change herself to conform to others ideas of what she should do or be.

So why do people who do not find her funny suddenly owe you an explanation as to why? Why is it even a point of analysis? If the hypothesis is that if you're not a feminist, you're more likely to not find her funny, is it not also possible that feminists are more likely to find her funny because they subjectively want her to be funny? Aka confirmation bias.

Amy doesn't seem to mind that some people don't find her funny, so I don't see why it seems to irk you so much.

ps. Tina Fey is hilarious in ways Schumer has never managed imo, as is Amy Poehler. Similarly, I find Eddie Murphy funny but never really got much of a laugh out of Richard Prior or Bill Cosby. That doesn't say anything about my values or attitudes towards women and black men, it's just a subjective opinion based on what they say or do.

Yeah, but it is complicated on my end. Hence I find her brilliant.

I love that you picked that particular "joke". I didn't like it at first -- I thought it was crude and I was instantly uncomfortable. And in the very next moment, I got it. I got what she was doing. She was taking a woman's body and the way it works AND TAKING THE SHAME OUT OF IT.

Now, if you aren't a person who is in touch with the shame that most women have about how their bodies work, that is just a crude nothing of a nothing.

But I am a woman who carries that shame. She exploded it. She made it on par with the tired old joke of men and their skid mark underwear. She turned it into NOTHING.

It isn't a very good joke. I agree with you.

And it is brilliant for what it achieves.

And that is why I love her. She does this over and over and over again. She is de-shaming women about their bodies and their sexuality and their mistakes. Guys are really good at making fun of themselves. It is one thing I really admire about men, and as I get older, even before Amy came along, I have thought we should emulate that characteristic. Amy is doing that for us. Bless her, really really bless her.

But I don't think you get the joke. Many women don't get the joke -- they are stuck in the shame and think she is just crude.

It's okay. You don't have to get the joke. You also don't have to enjoy anal fisting. Ha.

I'm sorry but your guitar still makes me think of anal sex.

Actually, I sorta agree with this. People's rights should not be put to popular vote.

Democracy be damned, the majority has no right to deny rights to a minority.

Shame you followed it up with some insane, nonsensical, anally fixated rant.

Until Far Cry 4 came along I had not considered sudden anal rape by a rhino to be a form of death I would encounter in a video game.
Also, it looks like those folks in Pamplona are going to have to step up their game now.

Okay, if this seems angry it is because it is. My wife and kids were hit head on by a car (Who sped up to get around the car she was passing...,) in a new van we just purchased, by a lady with no insurance. In Florida we get fucked for it (Thankfully they are alright...)

So here goes. You work for a bunch of cum guzzling money grabbing fuckfaces. It is a shameful job, unappreciated because your bosses want the most money at the expense of those who have just been through a terrible, horrible ordeal.

Insurance companies donate billions to lawmakers to keep these fucking stupid laws up. Florida's You-Pay-for-Uninsured-Motorist's laws are proof-fucking positive about that. "I am responsible so fuck my asshole wide please."

And the scare tactics of god damn claims adjusters?! Holy fuck, that shit would be considered assault anywhere else. Congratulations if you are one of the rare ones that don't threaten or low-ball...

Of course your company would charge it as 50-50 (or 70-30.) They would do it in every situation they could. Because it's all about the money to those anal-warted motherfuckers.

Never been a huge fan of star wars to begin with, but after George Lucas anally raped the series with those bleedingly awful "prequels", I have hated star wars ever since. So, I remain skeptical about whether this one will be any better.

I wouldn't put blame on any individual parents. And certainly everything I've read says not to stress kids out about elimination. Given where this kid seems to be, the dad is probably reacting fine (minus filming it).

It is pretty weird though that we westerners teach our babies to poop on themselves. It's by no means universal. If you give infants an cleaner way to poop, they'll generally use it. Anal control shows up naturally as soon as they start eating solid foods.

I think this is ok. Parent was pretty chill. Psychologically it must be a bit nuts to have parents freak the fuck out and rush you to the toilet for emergency poops. I mean, is it any wonder we have an anally retentive culture. Chill out parents, treat your kids with calm and if you can't make it to the bathroom for instructional defecation, its not the end of the world.

i believe the original title said that it was the first release by aphex twin in 13 years. and if you're going to get super anal about it, aphex twin is credited on 26 mixes for cash circa 2003 and the chosen lords comp circa 2006 (and we all know that AFX and aphex twin are essentially indistinguishable by any metric other than title and are generally use interchangeably).

@A-Winston @lantern53

Have you ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

I'll simplify it for you - those who are not well educated in a subject greatly overestimate their ability at the subject, because they don't know all of the things that they don't know.

Those who are better educated in a subject greatly underestimate their ability at the subject, because they know how complicated it is.

Now you two don't know about science, and that's ok - that's not an insult and i don't want any of this to be insulting. But it is meant to be a reminder that you are talking about one of if not the most technical and complicated abstract subjects that we as a species pursue. If you don't even understand the "scientific method" (a distinct term) and how the "scientific community" (another distinct term) works and comes to consensus, how can you possibly hope to decipher fact (science) from fiction (propaganda)?

I keep having to post this, but i'll do it again. The scientific community is made up of all kinds of people such as university lecturers and students (yes, your kids might be part of the community), amateur scientists, people at research institutions.... anyone who cares enough to approach things methodically and systematically, anyone interested in finding out as much as we possibly can about everything we can. Real science does not get paid based on results - the funding is provided for the research and the research finds whatever it finds. You can't lie about science, because other anal bastards (far worse than me) are just waiting to find something wrong with it and pillory it. That's how the scientific community works, it's like internet comments only worse. You can't get away with doing bad science for long.

Most people in scientific research do not have a lot of money, do you understand that? I can tell you right now - i contribute to scientific papers and such, so that makes me part of the scientific community. I'm just a post-grad student living on a student loan and doing something that i enjoy. My lecturers make a living, but they are not well-off by any means. We also suffer tax when politicians take our evidence and twist it in front of our faces. And we're left standing here, exasperated, wondering why you'd listen to non-experts over experts. If your doctor said you had diabetes, you wouldn't ask a politician to confirm it? If you want a scientific opinion, consult the scientific community.

I would love you to ask yourself the following question; "What do i really know about the scientific community and the scientific method?" Because if you took half an hour one day to go to an accredited university and ask the science department about how science works, how consensus is formed, and what makes good scientific practice, you'd be able to rid yourselves of these myths that somehow all scientists (i.e. average people, doing scientific research for the sake of science) are in some kind of club or gang or being paid to say that humans are causing climate devastation. The reason the majority of people say that is because the science speaks for itself and is not open to interpretation. The facts are facts.

Are you really thinking this through?

I want to show you one final thing, and it comes from the wikipedia page on Scientific method (which i recommend you read to avail yourself about which you speak, please don't speak from ignorance).

"The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself, supporting a theory when a theory's predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false."

The science speaks for itself, and i recommend you start listening to real scientists. Why prefer the opinion of a few individuals who are either flawed in their scientific reasoning or flat out being paid to lie? The scientific community is in full agreement.

Edit: Sorry for the long post, but you're talking about something you don't understand and it exasperates me. You wouldn't come here and talk about the details of internal medicine, but you're quite happy to tell a scientist, to his face, that he doesn't know science.

@Trancecoach - they respond in literature all the time. A scientist's response is to prove it, scientifically. They do, and are, all the time. But most people do not understand science and those that do still find scientific papers daunting and difficult to follow. People like the two i mentioned above, they don't have a hope in hell of understanding the source of the information, and they sadly look to the wrong people to explain it to them.