Oh, this thread has potential.

That was her most embarrassing moment? Did she have a memory wipe after that "Papa Don't Preach" performance?

Some people prefer a stick shift.

*clicks link*

*sees ex-fiance*

What is this I don't even

The confusion is indeed understandable:



/maybe he was just a little tipsy and didn't notice.

there their theyre: looks like a dude in a wig.

so does Kelly Osbourne

Get it?? Stick shift? TRANNY!?? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOP...HEY, GET THAT THING OFFA ME, GET THAT HOOK OFFA MY N..*OOF* *scuffle* *drag*

Tebow>Snookie>KOsbourne

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

*gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasp*

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA H A

IamKaiserSoze!!!: Tebow>Snookie>KOsbourne

KOsbourne>Fake tan>Armoured Wankball

That "guy's" hair makes me stabby.

Slackfumasta: Heterosexual men are attracted to shemales. Here comes the science:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-A8GvUehq4

Science? Bwahahahahahahaha!! He did part of his "research" by surveying female slash fanfic writers! His conclusions are drawn from their works.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *wipes eyes*

Re the article, good on ya, Luke. The trans is definitely more appealing than Kelly.

Mostly because I was around fandom when his survey hit and watched the back-pedaling and excuse-making unfold. Fandom mocked him (and his co-author) mercilessly which led to this researcher modifying his survey as he was collecting the data. Fandom's take on the matter can be read here (new window). Amongst their chief complaints were shoddy methodology and lack of peer review. Wikipedia says pretty much the same thing (new window) in the section on the guy's book, though in far more diplomatic language than fandom used.

And yes, before a fandom rant ensues, I would say there is a correlation between basement dwelling men and women active in fandom: Highly educated social misfits with the hope of being laid sometime during their lifetime. That is the stereotype, right?

Oh, and I might be attracted to trannies. NTTIAWWT

Slackfumasta: wont_eat_bugs: Science? Bwahahahahahahaha!! He did part of his "research" by surveying female slash fanfic writers! His conclusions are drawn from their works.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *wipes eyes*

Honestly curious, why do you think this is laughable? Is it not just one piece of data among many? Does this invalidate the entire body of work? Are you afraid you might be attracted to trannies?

Damn. My post above is in response to this.

/reply fail

Slackfumasta: I just read through all that, and I have to say that the fandom members sound more like they were upset about what they were discovering about themselves than they were with any problem in the data collection. Their biggest complaint was that this study was not reviewed by the IRB, which is noted in the Wikipedia article as only having jurisdiction over federally-funded studies, which this one was not.

In short: fandom folks (and most folks) don't like hearing things about themselves that make them uncomfortable, especially if those things might be true.

Quite possible, but the debates I saw had a number of criticisms of the survey itself, primarily that the researchers did no preliminary investigation into that which they were surveying. They made a number of assumptions about fandom, most of which were incorrect, and were shocked to discover they'd crafted their surveys based on a faulty premise.

The outcome of this guy's research isn't an article in a peer-reviewed journal. He co-wrote a pop psychology book that's about as useful as Dr. Phil on a good day.

It's not so much that fandom doesn't like to hear about itself, it simply prefers that the message comes from someone who has taken the time to know what it is before he or she decides to define it for others. Read the Time Magazine article on fanfiction. It was even-handed and fandom appreciated it.

Good discussion. Thanks.

I really, really hate when that term is used because it's almost always derogatory. Unless a transgendered person chooses to refer to themselves that way, it's generally not ok.


Also, I hope GLAAD calls Kelly Osbourne out on this one. It's really uncalled for to act like there's something inherently humiliating or bad about someone being attracted to a transgendered person. It wouldn't have been that hard just to say "I felt humiliated and hurt when I found out my fiance was cheating on me."

bobbette: Obviously this is some attempt to feel better about herself by pulling out all the derogatory language about trans women she can think of and belittling the other woman...

It's an ugly way to respond to being cheated on.

It really, really is. It's some fairly grotesque hate speech.

I hope that she gets called out on it beccause there's no excuse for that.

VikingQuestFan42: /GLAAD doesn't need to call her out
//Sick of these organizations getting their panties in such a twist over unimportant bullshiat

The language she directed towards trans people is ugly and uncalled for and what's really gross about it is that Kelly Osbourne has worked on campaigns to promote LGBT tolerance for awhile. If you're going to be an activist in that area, you have to put your money where your mouth is- it's so many kinds of wrong to decide that bigotry is ok when you're the one doing it.

She could have talked about being angry, humiliated, embarrassed- but the second she made it about this woman's gender identify, it turned into bigotry. Totally uncalled for.