They lost me after I read an article in which a Jez editor repeatedly referred to a women's size 12 as a "plus size". Byeeee!!!

i dig jezebel. i never read the comments because i find most comment threads for blogs and online publications (with the exception of HM, natch ) contain little more than incessant dribble. but that disemvowling is a hoot! sorry you feel burned by it.

i don't know who this kevin james is, but i'm actually kinda tickled that Jezebel points out the obvious misogyny of the hollywood machine. the blaring fact is schlubby dudes *do* get gigs all the time, while their female physical equivalents are rarely allowed to even audition without being told to loose XX pounds in the process.

Uggh. I think that sucks. Also if several people had posted your question, maybe the editors should address it instead of just blowing it off. As far as the basic idea of what you were saying, I get your point. I also understand the point that it's acceptable for over weight men to have skinny girls, but the reverse is uncommon. I think it is an really good discussion point, and could have been pursued with interesting results, kwim?

sorry that happened to you, but i think it's funny. disemvoweling people. what i wouldn't give to have the power to do that to assholes in my daily life.

on the bullshit on the other site.... isn't this a good site? i'm not big on message boards in general, not that it's a bad thing, but i'm just not. HM was my first, but i have gone to several others over the years, especially the last two. sometimes shit happens here and i'm like "oh what crap," but for the most it's pretty smooth sailing. other boards on the other hand..... that "oh what crap" moment often comes within days of joining, or very soon if not days. and when i look back, those kinds of moments are pretty rare on this site. for the most part we are able to work shit out amongst ourselves, and the place isn't run by people with axes to grind with other sites... no draconian rules to right the wrongs that were done to them elsewhere. which is, from what i can tell, what gives rise to these weird types of regulations. god, i was at a site where they had someone use the word "retarded" and the response was actual censorship, as well as public reprimands. as in, any words that can be construed as insensitive to people with intellectual disabilities was replaced with *****'s, and the person was put in their "penalty box," as it were. i can't remember what it was called. i quit that site immediately. it makes you appreciate HM more, is my point. very good judgment here.

but that disemvoweling is funny. i wonder if they implemented it just to be able to disemvowel people.

i asked under my original comment why i was disemvoweled and got a response from an editor that said "check your private messages." so i checked, and here's what was there: " i disemvoweled your comment for several reasons, the first of which was you accused me of being snarky -- this entire blog is snarky, and i get paid to snark. second, the point of me calling kevin james schlubby is that women who are his size or styled like him NEVER get cast alongside a hot guy. third, this point was brought up several times earlier in the thread, so you must have commented without first reading the other comments, which is against the rules. we're having echo chambers on this site lately -- people writing the same thing over and over - and hortense and i are trying to crack down on that and eliminate duplicate points. it's not personal."

uh, WHY WAS THIS RESPONSE NOT MADE PUBLIC?! wtf?? the readers aren't allowed to know why i was disemvoweled because it's a frigging secret? i'm MORE pissed now. she doesnt like that i called her "snarky"?! SHE MADE THE FUCKING "NO BODY SNARKING" RULE, AND THEN SHE BROKE IT! and why wouldn't she publicly explain the reasoning behind why she made the comment in the first place? that's exactly the kind of dialogue i was looking for! there could have been a wonderful conversation about the whole thing if she hadn't silenced me like some kind of bitchy dictator. and as far as not reading the comments first-- i DID read them (although not ALL 100 or so of them) and all i saw was someone agreeing and basically saying "yeah, what's up with that? fat guys get the hot girls in movies and then end up thinking in real life that they deserve to date supermodels" or something like that. not quite the point i was making, KWIM? i wanted to know, SPECIFICALLY, why it was considered acceptable for the comment to be made in the first place if the reverse would be considered wrong. nobody else asked that, so how was my question redundant?!

ugh. so i didn't even respond to the private message because i'm not going to engage in some stupid power struggle with one of their writer/editors. the bottom line is i'm pretty sure she was just pissed that i called her out for being a damn hypocrite, so she hit back in the only way she could, and then refused to publicly explain why! bah. fucking jezebel. deleted them from my faves and won't be back there unless someone pays me.

gawd this pisses me off.

wow, that is really messed up. Never went there and don't plan on going now. lame.

Dead to me (and Stephen) too. That's crap.

Sounds like the editors can't take a little criticism. I avoid Jezebel, too. Try out shakesville. I love them. Plenty of snark, but very consistent about being pretty honorable about it. And, no excessive editing of comments or moderating unless you are a troll.