'Beneath You'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
I find it hard to rejoice in the freakassitude now that there's a prosecution for child sexual abuse.
Plus the hiring of a brood mare to sprog, and the dangling from balconies. On that plane, I have concerns. However, on the plane of Freakass Celebrities, he is an unparalleled spectacle.
However, on the plane of Freakass Celebrities, he is an unparalleled spectacle.
True dat.
I wonder what broke him, what happened in his family, when combined with extreme fame and talent, and earning enough money that nobody who should have told him he was sick did tell him...well, it's just so sick and sad.
I wonder what broke him,
Child stars tend to be seriously broken, especially the ones who wound up supporting their families. (There are exceptions, obviously.)
You know, there is still the whole innocent until proven guilty thing going on in this country. No, really. Granted, the guy's got some major issues, but I'm still not sold on the molestation issue.
And I'm very freaking sick of hearing about it.
You know, there is still the whole innocent until proven guilty thing going on in this country. No, really.
I've noticed that tends to disappear when it comes to crimes against children.
VH1 had a documentary this weekend about Michael Jackson that explored his childhood and they had several specialists talking about how his current life could be attributed to the various physical and psychological abuses he faced as a child.
I think it raised some very valid points.
I just bought De-Lovely on OnDemand to watch while I do my laundry. Then I remembered that I really should clean my bedroom while the laundry is in. The room that the living room tv ISN'T in. I'm such a dope.
It is an ethics violation for a psychologist to give a diagnosis for a patient that he hasn't examined.
It is an ethics violation for a psychologist to give a diagnosis for a patient that he hasn't examined.
Is there a differentiation between a psychologist giving his/her opinion versus it being a diagnosis? I would think there has to be, what with psychologists who testify in court cases.