Who is the Bush/Clinton clan? I am so confused...
Willow: Happy hunting. Buffy: Wish me monsters.
'Beneath You'
Natter 69: Practically names itself.
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
§ ita § - Mar 01, 2012 1:38:14 pm PST #24709 of 30001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Zenkitty - Mar 01, 2012 1:40:59 pm PST #24710 of 30001
Every now and then, I think I might actually be a little odd.
Beverly, I'm pretty sure that's the track they're heading down.
Allyson - Mar 01, 2012 1:47:00 pm PST #24711 of 30001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
Do you guys think these are the death throes of a class of people who see the world moving on without them? all of this legislation seems especially weird, to me. Desperate.
amych - Mar 01, 2012 1:49:41 pm PST #24712 of 30001
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
Do you guys think these are the death throes of a class of people who see the world moving on without them?
That's how it's been feeling to me for a while, but I'm almost afraid to hope/say it out loud in mixed company.
Consuela - Mar 01, 2012 1:52:24 pm PST #24713 of 30001
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix
Do you guys think these are the death throes of a class of people who see the world moving on without them?
That's Jonathan Chait's theory--he had a long piece in NYMag about it the other day. That the white Christian male head of household is a shrinking minority, losing both his social and economic dominance over the country, and these last few years have been a desperate attempt to hold back the tide of urban multi-ethnic progressivism.
Zenkitty - Mar 01, 2012 1:52:25 pm PST #24714 of 30001
Every now and then, I think I might actually be a little odd.
Allyson, I do. I see it as people who are terrified of the world they see coming and are taking desperate measures to protect the world as they think it should be. Which I could respect if I didn't think they were dangerous and crazy. I'm just hoping that their worldview actually dies out and doesn't get passed on to further generations in power.
Calli - Mar 01, 2012 1:53:36 pm PST #24715 of 30001
I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul—Calvin and Hobbs
Congratulations, Juliana and M!
Consuela - Mar 01, 2012 1:54:07 pm PST #24716 of 30001
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix
And, of course, the world that they want to protect never really existed. Things were not, in fact, better in 1890, or in 1950. Or they were only better for rich white males -- and even they were unprotected from disease and contaminated air and water.
Connie Neil - Mar 01, 2012 1:58:06 pm PST #24717 of 30001
brillig
they were unprotected from disease and contaminated air and water.
Though back then there were more money-achievable enclaves that were less prone to disease and contamination. Their greed has even endangered their refuges, though, but they don't see it.
Or they have a secret moon base they'll all be leaving for soon.
amych - Mar 01, 2012 2:03:50 pm PST #24718 of 30001
Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?
And, of course, the world that they want to protect never really existed.
Nope. They don't actually want the Eisenhower era*. What they want is the leave-it-to-beaverized version where the 50s weren't full of massive migrations, racial tension, fear of the bomb, and the rest.
* on seeing the in-laws' church for the first time, I asked the then-bf "they're kinda the Amish, aren't they?" It's not that they think it's 1953, but they're quite content to live without anything that happened since.