Laurie Penny

Pop culture and radical politics with a feminist twist

New Girl: not so much a sitcom, more a new front in the war on twee

It's not technically impossible to fight patriarchy in a Hello Kitty thong, although it might be a little uncomfortable.

By Laurie Penny Published 14 January 2012 11:38

New Girl, Channel 4's flagship US import whose second episode aired last night, is not a sitcom so much as new front in the war on twee. The show stars every lonely child-man's fantasy indie girlfriend, Zooey Deschanel, as a hapless twenty-something who moves in with a group of, can you believe it, men, after breaking up with her boyfriend.

That's the plot. That's the whole of the plot. Cue a succession of lacklustre 20-minute riffs on the theme of boys and girls and how hilariously incompatible we are, during which Deschanel gabbles and twirls around with her candy-coloured skirts tucked into her knickers until female viewers with an ounce of self-respect get an overwhelming urge to rifle through our fix-up bags, find our sparkliest, prettiest make-up pencils, and push them firmly into the wet meat of our eyeballs.

The posters for the show depict Deschanel -- an adult woman whose real-life website is called "Hello Giggles" -- in a pastel tutu and a confused expression arriving in a packing crate, like a kitten waiting to meet her new owners. Treading the fine line between insulting and merely infuriating on dainty ballet pumps, New Girl was created by a woman and designed to appeal to women - Hollywood execs having finally realised that female viewers actually like to watch female leads with real personalities and real emotions.

Enter Jess, a character who seems to have been created, like the plot, by committee, specifically a committee of bored, sexist hipsters rummaging for inspiration in the reject bin of noughties pop culture.

Jess is the sort of manic-pixie-dream-cliche for whom words like 'kooky' and 'zany' were invented. She is precisely what mainstream culture believes a woman with 'personality' looks like: ram together some vintage bird-themed jewelry, wacky accessories, the sort of sunny disposition that wanders around singing little songs all the time, and an overplayed clumsiness - "oops, I fell off my heels!" - that, as several commentators have already noted, is the standard 'flaw' given to lady characters in a universe where women are required to have all the solid, three-dimensional weight of a cigarette paper - and voila, real female personality!

In its conviction that oversized glasses are an adequate substitute for actual character traits, New Girl is hardly guiltier of concessions in the war on twee than hundreds of Shoreditch teenagers. Jess is a two-dimensional caricature of the sort of girl-woman who, in real life, really does wear Hello Kitty thongs and kiddie clips in her hair and bakes endless cupcakes that don't even have any drugs in them.

I have met many iterations of 'that girl', and occasionally I have been her myself -- the girl who lisps and giggles as a way of making the men in the room feel better about the presence of a woman with a job and a mind of her own. When stereotypes are trotted out on television, sometimes we should ask ourselves what roles they play in real life.

It's not just Hollywood that's painfully uninterested in three-dimensional women with complex emotions. In a world where women and girls grow up negotiating a soup of stultifyingly gendered aesthetic cliche, sometimes the best way to tell the world you're hurting really is to cry theatrically and watch Dirty Dancing on repeat. So, we dumb down; we prattle when we could speak our minds; we play retro-cutesy as if to apologise for the modernity and maturity that so often terrifies the men in our lives.

It's not technically impossible to fight patriarchy in a Hello Kitty thong, although it might be a little uncomfortable. The war on twee, however, is a much an aesthetic crusade as it is a feminist one -- and as long as lisping, kiddie-clips and drug-free cupcakes remain in vogue, I'll know which side I am on.

Tags: feminism

More from Laurie Penny

119 comments

Sun, 2012-01-15 12:16 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

That's just what English Lit grads do. They analyse.

Sun, 2012-01-15 12:19 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

My girlfriend was a English Lit student. she dumped me because "we were incompatible". But we weren't. We loved each other ... she even said that... how compatible can you get?

But no she has to analyse it.

Sat, 2012-01-14 12:23 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

...OOOH, get you!

And are you absolutely sure it's got nothing to do with her being way better looking than you...and the fact that people seem to like her?

It did seem at one point in that 'review' that you'd kinda forgotten she wasn't a real person btw.

So I applaud your snatching some tiny sliver of credibility from the jaws of hyperbolic lunacy... if only by reverting to one of your patented and clichéd riffs on the patriarchy. What always surprises me is that when I look at the bottom of one of your articles, your English teacher hasn't scrawled in red biro:

"Try to be more original Laurie, and don't be afraid of cuts. The examiner is looking for a quick concise argument, not a predictable overblown rant. C+"

and...

"It's not technically impossible to fight patriarchy in a Hello Kitty thong, although it might be a little uncomfortable."

..this makes it sound as though sitting at a laptop and trotting out tired-out feminist 'truisms' actually requires combat fatigues, Doc Martins and a permanent scowl. Why is that exactly? Do you do your writing on a building site?

Thu, 2012-03-15 07:35 — RidgleyStanford

I particulalry liked his piece where he said he was expecting ranting abuse and profanity from you when every single piece i have ever seen written by him contains just that. I wonder if he genuinely cannot see the hypocrisy, its' hard to imagine how he couldn't. He is one of the fascist left so we should expect abuse,histrionics and calls for banning directed at anyone and everyone that dares to hold a view different to his. http://www.diyhomerenovations.org/

Sun, 2012-01-15 14:55 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"Newsflash: Men like the company of happy women who look like they'd be fun to hang out with. They do not like the company of bitter women who moan all the time. It's not rocket science..."

Yep, that sounds about right and pretty reasonable. However, despite that, you'll probably find that what you've just said constitutes a heinous patriarchal hate-crime and is in effect a verbal assault on womankind which renders you the moral equivalent of Pol Pot or Vlad the Impaler. But nobody will explain why, they'll just pop up scream 'MISOGYNY!!!' then vanish back into the foliage.

Sun, 2012-01-15 14:56 — Chir0n

@ Mr Divine. I blow his fucking brains out.

Sat, 2012-01-14 12:51 — Voice Of Moral Outrage (not verified)

Why does every person feeling the need to slap down a mildly feminist article have to comment on the looks of journalist if she is a woman? How does that have any bearing? If Laurie was a 50 year old man with a beer gut would you be making the same comment??? Would it even cross your mind to?

So the fact I'm way better looking you than you @SpudMiddleton obviously means my comments should be taken way more seriously. Or the fact you completely invalidate your point of view and reinforce Laurie's within 2 lines? Must try harder... you could fail in one sentence next time and so it only takes half the time to scan your trite kneejerk reaction for sense and move on looking for something that at least a 7 year old could more cogently argue in these comments.

Sun, 2012-01-15 14:57 — Chir0n

@Spud. Oh Jesus.

Are you her? Is that it? Are you actually Zooey Deschanel?

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:03 — Sir Michael (not verified)

"I have met many iterations of 'that girl', and occasionally I have been her myself -- the girl who lisps and giggles as a way of making the men in the room feel better about the presence of a woman with a job and a mind of her own"

Did it ever occur to you that men in the room don't necessarily feel threatened by women who are as successful (or indeed more successful) than they are? Or of they do feel threatened it has nothing to do with their gender but is simply the rivalry of another person in the job who can do it effectively?

Nothing is worse for gender equality than someone who is unable to see past gender roles and insists on bringing them into every single part of life, then loudly insisting they be removed. It reminds me very much of the so called "war on terror" - create the illusion of a threat, then announce that it must be stopped at all costs, and that you are the one to stop it.

This is another cutesey middle of the road crappy bit of fish out of water sitcom from the USA. That's the begining and end of it. To try to stir any sort of controversy over this, or to involve it in the emancipation of womyn, is beyond paranoid.

Sun, 2012-01-15 15:12 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

Chir()n

Finally, the penny drops

Someone had to be Zooey Deschanel; you gonna hold it against me?

The weird thing is I keep gettin abuse from the sisterhood. If only they knew.

I only do all this shite TV to fund my latest project. I call it a femo-eco-sphere. It's a big glass bubble in the Bolivian jungle where I rehabilitate silly whiny English public school girls who've started thinking they're radical femo-anarchists and making statements which, frankly, just embarrass the rest of us genuine feminists. After a couple of months with us, screaming about how oppressed they've always been-this generally centres on daddy not buying them a pretty enough pony, they usually head back to the Home Counties and bag themselves a nice fella...generally in merchant banking or Lloyds.

It's gruelling work, but if I didn't do it, can you imagine the damage they'd do to the feminism with their shrieking and histrionics?

Sun, 2012-01-15 15:14 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"can you imagine the damage they'd do to the feminism.."

Whoops...'the feminism'!

on second thoughts I like that...'the feminism'...sounds better actually

Fri, 2012-02-03 19:10 — Blind Willie (not verified)

I do feel sorry for women, all the television aimed at them seems to be the most vacuous crap imaginable. It's either ditzy girl having man problems or successful go-getter professional woman having man problems.

Then again a lot of male characters on television (especially in said female oriented programs) are just as one dimensional and stereotyped. I remember watching 'Sex and the City' once and not being able to decide what made me want to vomit more: the shallow women or the laughable men (Mr. Big or something?).

Also it's just an unfortunate fact that more people will find an interesting and well developed male character more appealing than a female one. Men will relate on some level to them and women may do to, or will swoon over them.

Female characters are only relatable to other women and men trying to get into said women's pants.

Sad but true.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:27 — David (not verified)

Laurie, don't watch it if you don't like it. The fact that it's from the States tells you all you need to know...

Sun, 2012-01-15 15:34 — Chir0n

"the feminism" is better. Particularly when pronounced with a Spanish accent (a la Manuel).

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:35 — My2Sense (not verified)

It's just a bit of fun..... not everything has to be ultra-PC, female empowering, realistic, intellectually funny, about serious issues and, dare I say it, a bit dull.

I do hope you only write these articles because you are paid to and not because this is how you live your life.

Rather than write about a TV programme created to entertain, and how it hasn't been written by feminist script writers, wrote about how Louise Mensch MP is going around saying that anyone talking about her looks is anti-feminist while also having cosmetic surgery and prancing around the GQ studios in designer clothes. Or is it easier to attack weaker targets?

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:36 — charlotte (not verified)

how much of it have you watched? i actually think it gets a lot better. it's one of the less sexist tv shows on tv, here or america.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:40 — Alex (not verified)

"Every lonely child-man's fantasy indie girlfriend, Zooey Deschanel."

Speaking as a lonely man-child, this is exactly what annoys me about her. Too well tuned to my demographic's fawning tendencies. Not sure if it's HER, or she's just typecast though.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:49 — John P Reid (not verified)

Laurie ,Like Melanie Philips before you, Your transition from Middle class toy town revolutionary to Daily Mail reactionary is on It's way, check back in 5 years ,And you'll be writing for the spectator.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:50 — Robert (not verified)

The NS comments moderation is a joke; I know it would be a full time job but could someone edit out the blatantly sexist comments under Penny’s articles? – if someone said this stuff after a talk they would be told to shut up and maybe to leave. And that should be the test. (I have sent an e-mail before about comments on this site - there was a comment that compared black and Asian antifascist to animals escaped from a zoo - and got no reply).
(Oh, and if anyone wants to get wasted try reading the comments under Penny’s stuff and taking a shot every time someone thinks he landed a blow by calling her writing ‘hyperbolic’. Do these people know (1) what that word means – it doesn't just mean polemical or colourful – and (2) that hyperbole is a *rhetorical device*? Criticising something for being hyperbolic without saying why use of the device fails is like criticising a politician speech for being repetitive; ‘yes we can, yes we can, come on Obama we heard you the first time!)

I'm not with Penny on New Girl. The ad is really sexist but ‘Jess’ isn't the person portrayed in the ad. I think Penny is being extra harsh on the show because she doesn't like the cutesy-hipster thing more generally - she is skating over the specifics of the show. (Also, so much of the criticism of hipsterdom is sneering and resentful that sensible critics like Penny would do well to explicitly distanced themselves from the reactionary ones.)
A few points in defence of New Girl:
Jess is friends with the male characters; sometimes they help her, some-times she helps them (it’s a bit like a kids show that way)but she is nether their mother, nor a damsel in distress.
Jess is not a woman from an American apparel ad; yes ZD is beautiful and part of the fun of the show is watching her but Jess isn’t presenting herself as a sexual object and even more importantly ZD plays Jess (in don’t think this is in the script; so credit to her) as being aware of how men see her so she isn’t an unwitting sexual object. (Like many real women she is both aware of the male gaze and sometimes worried she is not appealing enough; there is no contradiction there).
Yes it's a shame that for female characters in TV ‘kookiness’ is coming to stand for in ‘character’ and ‘befriend-ablness’ . But TV has got itself into a bind. Female characters who are young and attractive are so commonly defined by these qualities that something big is needed to quickly and easily - and quick and easy is what American sitcom characterisation must be -establish that the character is ‘more than just a hot girl’. So I think it's no good writing New Girl off because Jess is kooky; we have to look more closely at the character and the way the other characters relate to her. The real test will be whether more is done with the character as show rolls on; think about what Jennifer Anderson eventually did with the silly, spoilt, rich, clothing obsessed Rachel of the early Friends episodes - I know; a partial defence of Friends is as controversial as a partial defence of New Girl but here I stand willing to take on the world.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:50 — Ben (not verified)

Re: "Don't watch it if you don't like it"
Don't read Laurie's articles if you don't like them.

And how are you supposed to know you won't like a show if you don't watch it. If you just watch the trailer people will tell you, you have to watch a whole episode. And then if you don't like that, "Oh you have to keep watching, it doesn't really get good until episode 12." It's just the way American Network sitcoms work, they take a while to find their feet.

The show is pretty depressing about what it says about Hollywood views women. But the ironic thing is there are much better female led sitcoms from America.
There's 30 Rock with Tina Fey and Parks and Recreation with Amy Poehler both are network sitcoms starring women that are funny and who's characters aren't defined by the fact that they're women.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:55 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"Why does every person feeling the need to slap down a mildly feminist article have to comment on the looks of journalist if she is a woman?"

Because when the "mildly feminist article" obsesses with the looks of its subject, it becomes 'open season' on the looks of the author. I've criticised countless articles by Ms Penny. I'm fairly certain I've never even mentioned her looks prior to this...and other than a relative appraisal between her and Ms Deschanel, I haven't made a comment on any actual aspect of the author's appearance this time.

"So the fact I'm way better looking you than you @SpudMiddleton.."

dream on...I'm gorgeous

"Or the fact you completely invalidate your point of view and reinforce Laurie's within 2 lines?"

see above...I've dealt with this one. My mention of looks was entirely valid...or rather as valid as Ms Penny's.

"Must try harder... you could fail in one sentence next time and so it only takes half the time to scan your trite kneejerk reaction for sense and move on looking for something that at least a 7 year old could more cogently argue in these comments."

I think I'll skip the obvious comment about the lack of originality at this point and simply console myself that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

So all in all, you criticise me for referring to Ms Laurie's appearance while failing to bring a similar charge against her seeming obsession with those of Ms Deschanel...and then, lacking the imagination to come up with a style of your own, you throw a limp parody of mine back at me...also, your grammar is absolutely shocking.

Please respond if you have something relevant, grammatical and original to say.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:57 — Robert (not verified)

Re: charlotte
I agree. it's a low bar but if one flicks the channels when New Girl is on one will likely find it beats the others hands down on that score.
P.S a really good female character on American TV is Carrie Mathison in Homeland.

Sat, 2012-01-14 13:59 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"The NS comments moderation is a joke; I know it would be a full time job but could someone edit out the blatantly sexist comments under Penny’s articles? – if someone said this stuff after a talk they would be told to shut up and maybe to leave."

Ah another 'liberal', I see..."I don't like what's being said...CENSOR IT RIGHT NOW OR I'LL SCWEAM AND SCWEAM!!!"

You people are beyond parody.

Sun, 2012-01-15 17:56 — Fraziel1

@spud, great stuff. You own PJ Wall and did indeed make him look a prick. I particulalry liked his piece where he said he was expecting ranting abuse and profanity from you when every single piece i have ever seen written by him contains just that. I wonder if he genuinely cannot see the hypocrisy, its' hard to imagine how he couldn't. He is one of the fascist left so we should expect abuse,histrionics and calls for banning directed at anyone and everyone that dares to hold a view different to his.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:08 — Alan (not verified)

I agree with Spud. When you write something as irrelevant and vacuous as he/she has directly under the article, let it hang there to be seen by all.

And ridiculed. What a tosser.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:12 — Robert (not verified)

Re SpudMiddleton:
Penny did not attack Deschanel on looks - it would have been wrong for her to do so. She attacked the show and the way the character of Jess looks - that is, the choice of Deschenel and the way she is presented - which is part of the show. Can't see the difference? Here is an example: bell hooks criticises American films for tending to cast lighter skinned black women as opposed to darker skinned black women as characters who are supposed to be attractive. She argues that this choice reinforces a narrow and racist conception of female beauty. Is hooks attacking Hallie Berry for not being dark enough? Clearly not. Is she just sore because she is not as light-skinned as Berry? This would be an outrageous claim.

Feel free to reply if you have something to say which does not include boorish references to my grammar.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:16 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

Alan

Thanks for your support...you prick.

Do you lack the wherewithal to actually ridicule it yourself...or are you too busy "fighting the patriarchy" on other fronts?

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:18 — Leftygreg

I agree with Alan. Spud-for-brains has done enough to discredit him/herself. Now it can be left there to humiliate him/her. You know they're getting desperate and scraping the barrel when the grammar card gets played.

Sun, 2012-01-15 18:24 — Buckskins (not verified)

Fraziel1, wipe Spuds crap from your nose.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:18 — Robert (not verified)

re SpudMiddleton:
I support the NS comments policy which includes censoring blatantly racist and sexist comments. I just wish they would enforce it. Does that mean my liberalism deserves scare quotes? Not unless you think the NS is the state or is somehow stopping you from setting up a website of your own where you can attack female writers as motivated by jealousy of other women's looks.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:32 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"Penny did not attack Deschanel on looks"

I agree. I didn't say she'd 'attacked' her looks, I said she seemed obsessed with them. I simply don't see that as a valid feminist issue. Maybe it is these days...perhaps we're into the fourth wave or something by now and nobody saw fit to inform me.

"bell hooks criticises American films for tending to cast lighter skinned black women as opposed to darker skinned black women as characters who are supposed to be attractive. She argues that this choice reinforces a narrow and racist conception of female beauty."

...and as it happens, I can sympathise with bell hook's stance...what I have trouble with is her supposition that Hollywood's brief is broadening conception's of beauty...I'd always supposed they were there to make money out of films.

"Is hooks attacking Hallie Berry for not being dark enough?"

Halle Berry's mum's scouse...she supports Everton. On that basis alone I'd defend her skin colour against all-comers. The people's club is the people's club, matey. We'll take any pedestrians of the righteous path regardless of race, creed, culture, disability or age...except Dianne Abbott.

"Is she just sore because she is not as light-skinned as Berry? This would be an outrageous claim."

Indeed. Who claimed it, and why mention it?

"Feel free to reply if you have something to say which does not include boorish references to my grammar."

Please don't tell me which subject matter to include in my posts. My demand is for clarity only...the subject matter remains at the behest of the poster.

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:39 — Diane Dooley (not verified)

I was just talking about this with US friends a couple of weeks ago.

It's generally believed that this is the new "bimbo". i.e. new stock woman in fiction. Still stupid, but only now they listen to the Smiths and wear coloured tights. IDK.

She was in 500 Days of Summer as well, right? Another offensive bit of fiction - the guy spent the entire film chasing her like, WE LIKE ALL THE SAME THINGS, WHY DON'T YOU LOOOOVE ME?

There are always so many children in the comments section of your articles, Laurie. ):

Sat, 2012-01-14 14:40 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"Does that mean my liberalism deserves scare quotes?"

Indeed, because your "liberalism" is a blinkered and censorious system which doesn't correspond to any sense of "liberalism" which I've ever heard of. In fact your sense of "liberal" is generally termed "reactionary".

anyway...I'm off to the pub...I'll leave you liberals to get worked up.

I'm getting totally mortal'd before some nanny-knows-best'liberal' crusader like you brings in a law restricting me to three pints a day for my own good.

arrivaderci Poindexter

Sun, 2012-01-15 19:00 — John P Reid (not verified)

criticising New Girl is trolling by Laurie

Sun, 2012-01-15 20:30 — Fraziel1

@buckskins, it was more a go at PJ and his infantile way of looking at politics,namely everyone with a different view is to be insulted and abused and shouted down, than arse licking. I can't imagine anyone less inclined to brown nose than myself and i seem to remember you doing a bit of spud arse licking in the past yourself when he disappeared for a while and you were pining to have him back.

Sat, 2012-01-14 16:28 — McMac

Not entirely trolling here.

Don't you ever bore yourself writing what amounts to the same two articles again and again. What's it for? It's not journalism, it's not analysis, it doesn't break new ground or show new insights.

It's like reading an essay knocked together on the day of submission by a student failing their degree.

By the way, I'm not sure what happened on the morning they took your NS photo, but you appear to have forgotten to put a shirt on.

Sat, 2012-01-14 16:39 — John Cheese (not verified)

Eyes like Katy Perry & a bit of the plumpers- I like it!

Sun, 2012-01-15 20:38 — Barny

What a fun article!

Sat, 2012-01-14 18:05 — Fraziel1

laurie, i thought the programme was badly written drivel and you are right on some points but where we differe is I don't let it upset me and bother me to the point where i have to write an article about it. It was crap, the adverts showed it was going to be crap. acceptit and turn off. It is really scraping the barrel trying to make some sort of feminist comment about it.What an intense easily irritated miserable lot you feminists are.

Sat, 2012-01-14 18:08 — Dickie1

Spud Yawnington,

What a bore you are; what is it with you? can you just leave one of Laurie's articles alone, for once? It took you about 40 mins to comment on this, have you got some kind of RSS feed or something.

If we accept that you are the Marxist's Marxist, as well as an authority on feminist thinking, will you give it a rest? just for a while, or even one blog.

Honestly, what a knob-end!

Sat, 2012-01-14 19:07 — Chris Gilliver (not verified)

@David

The States produces much better TV than the UK. Check out The Wire or Breaking Bad for instance.

It was clearly a quiet news week when this article was written. Agree with Sir Michael.

Sun, 2012-01-15 23:31 — Spud Middleton (not verified)

"fun"??

How very dare you...I'll have you know this is...

'Pop culture and radical politics with a feminist twist'

If I wanted 'fun', I'd be reading some low-brow prolefodder. This is high-end cultural analysis by one of this country's leading avant garde intellectuals...apparently. Sort your head out. Haven't you seen the comments?

This place is a magnet for the political and artistic elite...Joey Essex has it on an RSS feed...so it's said.

Sat, 2012-01-14 19:36 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

D-504

Nice one...looks like it's all about me...which is about right...cos let's face it the article isn't worth a comment...except sonething along the lines of "blah-blah-bag of shite". I'm doing Laurie a favour and you know it. Who'd read this crap if I wasn't below the line fighting the good fight for common sense, objective reality and havin a laugh?

Peter Sutcliffe

nice theory...except my message about being pub-bound was to let all you small-minded deluded would-be lefties...like you know the fuckin meaning of "the left"..ha...that nothing interesting's gonna happen for a while. I'm back now...you watch the comment rate pick up.

By the way, I'd like to challenge any of the other 'drive-by feminists'...whose feminism seems restricted to shouting 'misogynist' at anything they don't really like then ducking for cover...to tell me why my first comment was misogynist. I mean precisely. "I don't like it" really doesn't cut it any more the fact that it's an offence against a mindset which espouses mindless adoration at the sight of anything Laurie Penny writes. I even went back and looked. I really can't see it. Please enlighten me.

Honestly, what a bunch of knob-ends!...to paraphrase one of Laurie's adoring acolytes, and no doubt a left-wing thinker of some renown.

Oh yeah...Peter Sutcliffe..is "a lady working as a prostitute" the PC expression for "female prostitute"? I like it. It carries with it an evocation of old-world charm...well done sir...more power to your doubtless delicate wrist.

Sat, 2012-01-14 19:37 — Abdoujaparov (not verified)

I think Ring of Fire has a point (and I'm not talking about the lack of shirt).

Sat, 2012-01-14 19:42 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

greg

"You guys seriously need to learn how to spot trolling."

hmmm...I know English literature has been elbowed out of the curriculum over the past couple of decades to make way for 'Respecting-Everything-That-Moves-So-We-Don't-Remotely-Offend-Anyone-Studies' but I still think there's room for this little gem...Pope was a mensch and never better than in his 'Epistle to Doctor Arbuthnot'

"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer."

sorry pal, 'Troll' isn't a term to which I can attach any meaning.

Mon, 2012-01-16 00:14 — p j wall (not verified)

@Fraziel1
Oh dear, it seems you`re getting Paranoid again?, saying anyone who won`t agree with you is a left wing Fascist!!, Calm Down!, stop getting agitated!, Strange to see that i`m still getting to you?, You keep going on about getting shouted down, and picked on?, perhaps you`re stressed?, with your obsession against Benefit claiments!, take a break, You don`t need to brown nose to the attention seeker, i take all your insults as a compliment!, Cheers.

Sat, 2012-01-14 19:47 — SpudMiddleton (not verified)

"I think Ring of Fire has a point (and I'm not talking about the lack of shirt)."

Then I think I speak for many-not myself I hasten to add-when I say you're clearly a misogynist and evil minion of the patriarchy.

Man...that felt good...I've always wanted to call someone a misogynist for no apparent reason...I feel all righteous and superior.

Mon, 2012-01-16 00:30 — Dickie1

"This is high-end cultural analysis by one of this country's leading avant garde intellectuals..."

I'm not sure Mr Divine is avant garde exactly (assuming that's who you meant), though his sausage argument is shaping up into a 'free form' jazz of its own.