Wax and I got onto the subject of bad epithets...

[cimorene]

...and it occurred to me that I now have a tie for favorite epithet I've ever read! That doesn't happen often. I mean usually there's ONE most horrifying fictional occurrence (example: child rape, still the top of The Horrifying Things Scale) or ONE hilarious epithet. Shocking things tend to blow whatever previously-most-shocking thing came before them out of the water, instead of leaping into a dead heat.

Poll #893 Funniest Epithet

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 15

View Respondents

Which of my two favorite epithets is funniest?

View Answers

The average-sized apartment for a man who lives alone
3 (20.0%)

The red-haired athletic tennis player with a permanent bandage as a facial accessory
12 (80.0%)

Indeed those are funny but this write-in is funnier:

View Answers

Speaking of The Horrifying Things Scale, I still place penis shrapnel at a mere 9/10 while child rape takes the cake at 10/10, but until recently I'd read three child rape stories and only one Penis Shrapnel Story, because, really, penis shrapnel: it's not the kind of thing you just come up with. But as of two days ago I've now had to say that I have read two penis shrapnel stories. Admittedly, there was no shrapnel, but there was a surprise!penis disfigurement involving Metal In A Way That Penises Aren't Meant To Involve Metal. And I think that, morally, that has to be grouped with Penis Shrapnel.

Comments

[cimorene]

Hahah, that's one way to put it. 'Don't understand what they've written' can probably be applied more or less to anyone who subscribes to RTD's particular attitude towards criticism ('What meta? How can racism/homophobia be on TV/meaningful in an institutional context/applied to ME? It was totally just an individual ~~artistic~~ decision! It was NECESSARY FOR THE ANGST!'), because although most of their protestions are heavy on the butthurt and probably disingenuous, to deny the context of a piece of popular media as a member of a societal pattern is... at best a really limited understanding.

[cupidsbow]

*nods* You know, I've kind of hit a point where non-internet people annoy me just by opening their mouths, because they keep saying stupid shit like that. And then they look at me as though I'm the one who's crazy. :/

[cimorene]

Yes, it's kind of a stonewall to discussion when someone doesn't believe in the societal-institution level of context. How can you understand anything to do with interaction between people if you don't have this concept? How can a gay man honestly think it's possible to produce queer texts magically free of context-laden meanings?