Tell that to the assclown Superduperfreakanomics authors. Fucktards.
I was very disappointed in Jon Stewart's interview with whichever one of them it was this week - total softball questions. Those guys deserve every piece of hate mail they get.
'Trash'
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Tell that to the assclown Superduperfreakanomics authors. Fucktards.
I was very disappointed in Jon Stewart's interview with whichever one of them it was this week - total softball questions. Those guys deserve every piece of hate mail they get.
Tell that to the assclown Superduperfreakanomics authors. Fucktards.
I was very disappointed in Jon Stewart's interview with whichever one of them it was this week - total softball questions. Those guys deserve every piece of hate mail they get.
It is nice, on the other hand, to be able to identify at least 2 men who think all women are whores, so I know who to eviscerate avoid.
Except that only one of them does TV appearances, and I can't remember which one he is! (Levitt, I think. But I doubt I could pick him out of a lineup unless he were holding a copy of the book.)
Except that only one of them does TV appearances, and I can't remember which one he is!
I meant "identify" not so much as in visually, but more as "Ah, because they both put their names on this piece of misogynistic crap, I know how they really feel about women."
but more as "Ah, because they both put their names on this piece of misogynistic crap, I know how they really feel about women."
Somehow that's less satisfying than "identify visually so I know who to throw rocks at if I should ever pass one of them on the street."
Gud, yes, and I know that the Big Answer is that I love it when random people think I'm great, but I usually don't think that I am...
What?
I meant "identify" not so much as in visually, but more as "Ah, because they both put their names on this piece of misogynistic crap, I know how they really feel about women."
What did they write? I never read Freakanomics, but I always got the impression it was like a collection of interesting correlations.
What did they write? I never read Freakanomics, but I always got the impression it was like a collection of interesting correlations.
There was a more recent one that I can't find that was basically wondering why more women aren't prostitutes, since it makes good economic sense to be one, but this one from last December was also pretty bad: [link]
In their new book (Superfreakonomics), they describe one (white, attractive, upper-middle-class) woman who was able to earn a lot of money as a prostitute, and conclude, based on *only* her experience, by wondering why more women aren't prostitutes: [link]
My bad, dude, I think I was aiming that at Typo Boy, maybe? Y'all sort of remind me of each other, and I've been afraid that I might do that...I guess today was the day. Oops. Never mind.