Roomie got me up at ass o'clock in the morning to go grocery shopping, and so here I sit, a naked, bleary-eyed lump of curdled bonhomie. It's probably a good thing that I'm naked, because if I weren't, I'd be tempted to drag my twisted body up the stairs, pound on my upstairs neighbor's door, and then batten my teeth into his ankle when he answers. The fucker has the uncanny knack of being quiet until the nanosecond I crawl into bed. Then he seizes that moment to indulge in his hobbies of jogging with concrete shoes and testing the comparative wind resistance of bowling balls and Skittles by dropping them on the floor. I'm tired of being awakened at 4AM by the thudding crescendo of elephant ballet. I wish he'd move out, the clog-wearing, dam-fucking dipshit.
God, a new house can't come soon enough.
The level of defensive hysteria in the "Was Danny Responsible for Ruben's Death?" thread on TalkCSI is hilarious. I understand identifying with and being protective of your favorite character. I did it all the time with Snape, and I do it all the time with Flack. But holy moly, some of the Danny fangirls have a hard time grasping that Danny isn't real, and that any indictment against him is therefore harmless. Saying that Danny is in some measure responsible for what happened on that street corner won't send Kevlar!Flack and the Super SWAT Squad crashing through his door with handcuffs and hot needle in hand. Nor does such a conclusion mean that Danny was intentionally negligent or acted with malicious intent. It just means that his actions contributed to Ruben's death. And they did.
If we're supposed to give Danny a free pass because OMGit's Danny, he didn't mean for it to happen, then why isn't the same free pass being extended to Laughing Larry, who is being cheerfully held accountable for a thirty-year-old drowning at which he was not present and which he therefore could not have prevented? All he did was sell an admittedly cheap toy, but because Flack and Lindsay didn't like him, fandom is only too happy to attach more culpability to him than they are to woobie Danny, who could've done more before and after the shooting to possibly alter the tragic outcome. Methinks it's the Laura J. Dampcunt Law of Inverse Proportionality at work. The hotter the guy involved in a matter of dubious ethics or morality, the less responsibility and fewer consequences he must accept. Using this complicated principle, we can see that a cop with the hotness of Flack will never suffer any consequences, whereas Andy Sipowicz would be stripped to his skivvies, covered in ants, slathered in barbecue sauce, and torn apart by jackals.
Danny is partially responsible, period, and no deft manipulation of the moist, pink button hidden inside the fangirl-issue tingle-pants will change that.
God, a new house can't come soon enough.
The level of defensive hysteria in the "Was Danny Responsible for Ruben's Death?" thread on TalkCSI is hilarious. I understand identifying with and being protective of your favorite character. I did it all the time with Snape, and I do it all the time with Flack. But holy moly, some of the Danny fangirls have a hard time grasping that Danny isn't real, and that any indictment against him is therefore harmless. Saying that Danny is in some measure responsible for what happened on that street corner won't send Kevlar!Flack and the Super SWAT Squad crashing through his door with handcuffs and hot needle in hand. Nor does such a conclusion mean that Danny was intentionally negligent or acted with malicious intent. It just means that his actions contributed to Ruben's death. And they did.
If we're supposed to give Danny a free pass because OMG
Danny is partially responsible, period, and no deft manipulation of the moist, pink button hidden inside the fangirl-issue tingle-pants will change that.
Tags: