Perfect. Although, I'd be a bit more cynical about whether Bretos' verbal gaff was accidental or not. Err, assuming he wasn't pushing the corners of his eyes backward with his fingers while saying it in a sing-songy Micky Roony voice.
Everyone references those 72 virgins that jihadi martyrs get. That sounds like a rotten deal for those 72. Imagine spending your entire life being pious and celibate, getting into heaven unscathed. You've done your duty batting away horny adolescents, Beer Pong, Chatroulette wank sessions, the works.

Then you arrive and The Bearded Man In Charge says, "Great. Now some guy you've never met gets to use you as his sex slave for all eternity. DEAL with it!"

Then He says, "This makes so much sense, I'm going to do it times seventy-two! Times whatever number of jihadis willing to blow themselves up. Ladies (or comely lads), line up 'n spread 'em! Forever!"

God's an assh*le.

Won't someone fight for this injustice?

But hey, since that Lin fellow popped on the media stage, Old Pat is now "comfortable" around Teh Yellow.
Hooray!
Is it playing the Race Card to say that anyone who needs the f*cking NBA before a different raced person is "acceptable" is a f*cking racist?
F*CK!
Same here as far as visiting Reddit's nuked groups, with all the "ass", "u" and "me" alerts. You've expressed how I feel about watering down the term wonderfully.
I think it's a dumb distraction that Reddit was wise to nuke, simply because the potential for manufactured internet outrage is so blindingly obvious.

Creeptastic pervs seeking bikini beach shots of 12-year-olds should have the initiative to find them themselves w/o a site (Facebook, Reddit...) making it easier for them. BUT. Child porn is an evil of the highest order, and we shouldn't conflate the two. Words (and definitions) matter.

Stopping child porn requires the perspective necessary to target efforts for maximum efficiency & effectiveness, is what I'm getting at.

I'm also queasy over the thought of classifying any photo of anyone under 18 as "child porn". Will documenting school swim meets require Federal registration? Photos at the beach that have a kid playing in the water off in one frame result in a call from the po-po? What happens to true criminals when the investigative bandwidth is choked by things like this?

I'm further alarmed at gov't efforts to spin any pushback on unreasonable legislation (SOPA, warrantless searches, ACTA, ISP surveillance, etc) as efforts to protect child pornographers, rather than sensible protection of civil and artistic liberties (don't scoff: they do it all the time).

We're on the same side, we just differ on whether to use a shotgun while drunk wearing a blindfold, or a rifle. :)

Because necrophiliac pedophiles need somewhere to go? (joke, people. Yeesh!)
You raise a good point.

Cheerleading set on FB. Middle school, at beach.

Now let's assume there's a link to it somewhere, pointing to it from some sad perv, writing, "HAWT. Check it out!"

ZOMG, Facebook is a PORN SITE!!!!

(Or, let's split hairs and say the other site linking to middle school girls wearing bikinis at the beach is, but you see my point).

We can't protect the world from pervy geezers who are titillated by what healthy people see and go, "Aww, cute pix!"

Simply that kiddy porn is abhorrent and foul. Haven't seen any, don't want to. But I've seen porn, and can connect the dots.
Beach shots or skateboard pix, grouped together in an area that other sites then point fingers at shouting CHILD PORN ain't it.

Save the outrage for child pornographers, is all I'm saying.

I think those kiddy pageants cause more harm than the Reddit "porn" page.

Again (sigh, sad to have to say this three times: CHILD PORN. BAD!)

Obvious disclaimers:
* Not having frequented the Reddit "porn" pages, I'm assuming they're normal pictures, not explicit, not sexual, or even "nature" photos. Bets are off if they do.

* I'm also assuming they're not someone's private photos snatched and moved there, cuz were I a kid I'd feel pretty grossed out discovering my swim meet pix displayed there.

"Banning Child Porn" has so much more of a ring to it than, "Removing pictures of girls at a pool or bareshirted boys skateboarding".

The thing is, there IS real kiddy porn out there, and muddying the line in this fashion lets off real perpetrators and victims.

Although, it's spin/hype like this that makes Reddit's choice a wise one.

So much for my secret fetish of being approached by a clown waving a 18" dildo, accompanied by two sidekicks packed into a horse costume, promising me Whippets, Amyl Nitrate and showing me their Grindr profile photos of their sling festooned with Care Bear decals. Now it's ruined forever.

Thanks, John Wayne Gacy, for destroying another dream. Thanks a lot!

Gawker's receptionist, Mr. Pumperkins. But the trick is you have to squeak like a mouse or the odds of getting him away from pawing frantically at the goldfish bowl is practically nil.
Don't you people know that slave owners were the original "job creators"?
Really. If ever a Gawker article screamed* to be written by Moylan, this is it.

That said, Maureen did a fantastic (dare I say, FABtastic?) job. Kudos!

* Rapturously, loudly, and proudly. Preferabally with headbanging-against-bedboard accompaniment.

Good gods, man.
Your cat's family already has enough grief to deal with if someone murdered him. Why would you then want to go and kill the rest of his family, including distant relatives?

And killing your already murdered cat? That's just overkill.

OBvious fake.
Cats spell it "SRSLY".
It depends.
Carnally desecrating the corpse, or not? Video, or just photos?
Or that North Korea will turn... Fabulous!
Damn.
I clicked hoping to read that a cat was murdering people, one by one, by one.
Until there were none left, and he'd be crowned King of England.
He (she, or pending-gender-assignment candidate) would tell you. But then he/she/pending-but-trending-decidedly-in-one-direction would have to kill you.
With his/her/pending-but-trending-decidedly-in-one-direction's cock.
Tomorrow's News
More Stories…