If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Facebook)   The Onion decides that the line between "funny" and "Even Seth MacFarlane thought it wasn't funny" is calling a nine-year-old girl a c*nt   (facebook.com) divider line 54
    More: Followup, Seth MacFarlane, The Onion, onions  
•       •       •

8400 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 25 Feb 2013 at 2:08 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-25 01:55:15 PM  
10 votes:
To all the people who are all butthurt over The Onion calling Quvenzhané Wallis a horrible name: You embody The Onion's slogan, "Tu Stultus Es." Or, in English, "You Are Dumb."

Please don't misunderstand...I'm not defending them. What they did was in poor taste, no doubt about it. It crossed the line, for sure. But lest we forget - at its best, satire is supposed to do one thing. And that is: hold a mirror up to society, and show it where its warts are. And in calling the least-offensive person on the red carpet (a charming, poised, adorable, talented, and universally-praised 9-year-old) the MOST offensive word that exists, what The Onion was TRYING to do was to make us think.

How often do we dismiss some celebrities as being "bad people" without even knowing them? I know some people who claim to not be able to stand Anne Hathaway, or Taylor Swift, or who will not see anything Gwyneth Paltrow does, because they say they "hate" them. Many actresses in particular seem to suffer this kind of stigma. We just judge them so easily. Certain public figures just rub us the wrong way, and that's fine...If irrational, and often misguided.

Pointing that out was all The Onion was trying to do. To ask us to consider why we harbor weird prejudices against certain people we don't even know. By calling a beloved young talent by a nasty slur, the goal was the same as if they'd said, "Is it just us, or is Tom Hanks a piece of shiat?"

So, yes...What they did was ill-advised, and designed for maximum shock value. As such, feel free to lambaste them if you must. But for fark's sake...At least do it for the right reasons. Not because you were too thick to comprehend the impetus of their intent.
2013-02-25 02:22:43 PM  
7 votes:
This kind of humor is tricky.

When it works, it's because what was being said was so outrageous that the audience is in on the joke. The humor is that both parties realize that what was said was ridiculous.

Unfortunately, at 140 characters of text, and given the usual expectations for Twitter, the joke doesn't come across as anything more than a mean insult.  Which means that it fell flat and instead of having a nice little meta-joke about offensive jokes, we just have something that looks like an offensive joke.

Ultimately, I think that it's a case of no real harm done. The Onion took a swing, recognized they had a miss, scrubbed the joke and issued and actually contrite apology.

At this point, the only people who are shouting are a) people who go out of their way to be offended and b) people who think that self-censorship is a traitorous violation of the 1st Amendment. Which is to say, in both cases, a whole bunch of stupid c%nts.
2013-02-25 02:17:42 PM  
6 votes:

vernonFL: I thought it was funny. Its satire, and it was making fun of Hollywood and the entertainment industry, not the girl.


I get it, and I understood it to be exactly this. Or at least, that was their intent.

That said... they stepped waaaaaayyyy over a line here. Then they realized it. Then they apologized.

The end.
2013-02-25 01:37:24 PM  
6 votes:

Vodka Zombie: the801: skimmed like 4 articles about this and saw nothing even hinting of an explanation as to what caused someone to think she's a coont. i have to imagine that she said or did something or was in some way coontish for anyone to have mentioned it.

/have no idea who she is; didn't pay attention to the oscars at all.

I can kind of understand the joke they were trying to make.  It's right up there with "Mr. Roger's dreams of burying hookers in the desert."

But, they fell flat on their faces this time.  And, that's what happens when you just try too hard.


The spirit of the joke was funny and typical Onion. The choice of that particular word for a nine year old was wrong.
2013-02-25 01:57:14 PM  
5 votes:
FFS Fark how about linking to something that has the actual offending tweet on it so people don't have to google it themselves?

http://www.heavy.com/regions/2013/02/onion-calls-9-year-old-coont-twe et -oscar-nominee-tweet/

Not cool, Onion.

Seriously, that aint satire by any stretch of anyone's imagination.

That's just farking mean-spirited dreck and you were correct to scrub it off the net and apologize.

Got that much right anyways.
2013-02-25 12:50:56 PM  
4 votes:

milsorgen: Who cares, words are just words. They only have the power you impart to them and it makes no sense to me to keep making it the BIG BAD of words.


Says the guy who doesn't want to stop treating the people in his life horribly.
2013-02-25 12:48:57 PM  
4 votes:
I thought it was funny.
2013-02-25 12:47:33 PM  
4 votes:
Why are people expecting tact and restraint from the Onion?
2013-02-25 02:09:33 PM  
3 votes:

Lando Lincoln: yanceylebeef: I thought it was funny.

I did too. I guess we're just two crass jerks. Or some other people don't understand that the Onion was not actually calling her a coont but was instead making fun of Seth McFarlane.


[quizzicaldog]

Seth said... "To give you an idea how young she is it'll be 16 years before she's too old for Clooney."

That's a joke.

What the Onion said was not a joke and then went well over the line and just kept going.

You're just making excuses and trying to look edgy hipsters.

"Crass jerks" comes a lot closer to the truth.
2013-02-25 01:13:30 PM  
3 votes:
I love that some people are saying things like "There's an apology, but it's too little, too late."

The tweet went up late Sunday night, came down an hour later, and the apology -- a real one, not "sorry you were offended" -- was online before lunch on Monday.

That's lightning fast.
2013-02-25 11:56:45 AM  
3 votes:
From Facebook:

Feb. 25, 2013

Dear Readers,

On behalf of The Onion, I offer my personal apology to Quvenzhané Wallis and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for the tweet that was circulated last night during the Oscars. It was crude and offensive-not to mention inconsistent with The Onion's commitment to parody and satire, however biting.
...
No person should be subjected to such a senseless, humorless comment masquerading as satire.

The tweet was taken down within an hour of publication. We have instituted new and tighter Twitter procedures to ensure that this kind of mistake does not occur again.

In addition, we are taking immediate steps to discipline those individuals responsible.

Miss Wallis, you are young and talented and deserve better. All of us at The Onion are deeply sorry.

Sincerely,

Steve Hannah
CEO
The Onion
2013-02-26 03:42:18 AM  
2 votes:
Good line I heard earlier:

Satire is like shooting an apple off someone's head. It looks really cool when you do it right, but when you screw it up, nobody cares what you were trying to accomplish.
2013-02-25 03:33:41 PM  
2 votes:

gilgigamesh: No one is insisting they were really calling her a coont.  People are insisting that it is inappropriate to publicly call her that,


...

In case it wasn't clear, I'm having a very hard time reconciling the "I know they weren't calling her a coont" thought and "They shouldn't have called her a coont" thought. I would say we're dealing with Schrodinger's Coont but I don't feel like issuing an apology right now.

The joke worked, and if people weren't simultaneously blinded by the instinct to protect children and outrage over The C Word, they could easily understand the point of the joke: that Hollywood is filled with people who, for one reason or another, us "regular" folk have no problem calling every name in the book. That tweet just took the tomato-throwing mentality to its logical conclusion, where this purely fictional charactercalls the lest deserving target possible the worst name possible.

That this has to be explained anywhere is a real shame.

This girl--who I guarantee most of the people ripping their hair out over this had never heard of before last night--wasn't singled out for it. It wasn't anything personal. She was just the perfect vessel to deliver the commentary. I suppose you could have used an adult who has a reputation for being an innocent for the joke but a: there aren't that many of them in the industry these days and  b: it wouldn't be as funny as the little girl who is already there!

I don't mean to direct any anger at you,  gilgigamesh. It got away from me. But really...it's just a joke.
2013-02-25 02:51:34 PM  
2 votes:
They're not firing someone for using the c-bomb to talk about a 9-year-old...they're firing someone because "using a bad word" is not the same as "being funny."
2013-02-25 02:30:37 PM  
2 votes:

MNguy: quatchi:

Seth said... "To give you an idea how young she is it'll be 16 years before she's too old for Clooney."

That's a joke.

You're drawing a pretty fine line there.  What some people find funny, others may not.


I realize this. Humour is a very subjective thing. That noted, calling a 9 year old a coont goes beyond the pale.

And anyone arguing that it was a joke a Seth's expense is basically an idiot.

Even Seth's joke about her was at Clooney's expense not hers.

Although whether it was a burn or a compliment to Clooney's ability to get younger women into his bed is debatable.
2013-02-25 02:21:03 PM  
2 votes:

vernonFL: I thought it was funny. Its satire, and it was making fun of Hollywood and the entertainment industry, not the girl.


All by itself, without context, it's offensive.  Satire requires context.
2013-02-25 01:55:53 PM  
2 votes:

Shostie: Why are people expecting tact and restraint from the Onion?


Actually, good satire uses quite a bit of restraint.  The Onion is great because of the line it straddles.
2013-02-25 12:44:31 PM  
2 votes:
Who cares, words are just words. They only have the power you impart to them and it makes no sense to me to keep making it the BIG BAD of words.
mhd
2013-02-26 03:20:57 AM  
1 votes:

3rdtimearound: obscure


Obscure, on Fark? We know all the references, even the one about the farking space hairdresser and the cowboy.

/He's got a tinfoil pal and a pedal bin.
2013-02-26 01:45:55 AM  
1 votes:

Ambivalence: Well it's good to have standards.


This, I suppose.  It's sort of why I have a problem with the "everything goes" brand of humor.

Nothing is sacred? Fine, that just means you have no standards.
2013-02-25 10:17:32 PM  
1 votes:

Tyrone Slothrop: MNguy: quatchi:

Seth said... "To give you an idea how young she is it'll be 16 years before she's too old for Clooney."

That's a joke.

You're drawing a pretty fine line there.  What some people find funny, others may not.

One is making fun of a grown man, the other is making fun of a 9-year old.


No, its making fun of the writer, presumably some catty hollywood commentator. The girl is the target because she's nice, making the writer themselves the actual cnnt.
2013-02-25 08:45:50 PM  
1 votes:

MaxxLarge: To all the people who are all butthurt over The Onion calling Quvenzhané Wallis a horrible name: You embody The Onion's slogan, "Tu Stultus Es." Or, in English, "You Are Dumb."

Please don't misunderstand...I'm not defending them. What they did was in poor taste, no doubt about it. It crossed the line, for sure. But lest we forget - at its best, satire is supposed to do one thing. And that is: hold a mirror up to society, and show it where its warts are. And in calling the least-offensive person on the red carpet (a charming, poised, adorable, talented, and universally-praised 9-year-old) the MOST offensive word that exists, what The Onion was TRYING to do was to make us think.

How often do we dismiss some celebrities as being "bad people" without even knowing them? I know some people who claim to not be able to stand Anne Hathaway, or Taylor Swift, or who will not see anything Gwyneth Paltrow does, because they say they "hate" them. Many actresses in particular seem to suffer this kind of stigma. We just judge them so easily. Certain public figures just rub us the wrong way, and that's fine...If irrational, and often misguided.

Pointing that out was all The Onion was trying to do. To ask us to consider why we harbor weird prejudices against certain people we don't even know. By calling a beloved young talent by a nasty slur, the goal was the same as if they'd said, "Is it just us, or is Tom Hanks a piece of shiat?"

So, yes...What they did was ill-advised, and designed for maximum shock value. As such, feel free to lambaste them if you must. But for fark's sake...At least do it for the right reasons. Not because you were too thick to comprehend the impetus of their intent.


Yeah no. You are giving them WAY too much credit this time. Somebody there thought it would be shocking and fbackfired and it backfired. You clearly put WAY more thought into it than anyone there did.
2013-02-25 08:03:04 PM  
1 votes:

YoungLochinvar: Qellaqan: DeaH: Qellaqan: MNguy: Qellaqan: The seth macfarlane joke and the onion joke seem in poor humor to me for the same reason-- they sexualize a nine year old. I don't care if they're trying to make fun of Clooney... she's nine.


...

Except your hypothetical satirical take wouldn't even work because people are apparently *seriously* discussing that (and as an aside, how farked up is that)? What's sad is that somebody could've said the exact same thing, in seriousness, about Anne Hathaway or Jennifer Lawrence and the outrage would've been minimal-to-nonexistent. The Onion probably went too far, but look at the lack of self-examination in this thread. The fact that we, the public, were the butt of the joke went over so many heads it's sad...

My point is more that joke or no, a nine year old is inappropriate as the subject. Because she is a person. And because has nothing to do with any of this social shiat we are debating.

Just because we don't think the "joke" is funny doesn't mean we didn't get it. Just that maybe "edgy" humor doesn't fix the fact that it picks on little children too.
2013-02-25 07:32:19 PM  
1 votes:
You coonts need to lighten up.

/not like they called her an uppity n-word
//THAT would have been some insensitive shiat
///But thanks to the hyper-reactive butthurt of untold thousands, young Ms. Wallis will have to hear about this unfortunate tweet for days now, instead of the never she would have heard about it in a world without Helen Lovejoys.
2013-02-25 07:00:24 PM  
1 votes:
Theres nothing satirical about calling a 9 year old a coont.  Im more offended at how lazy that "joke" was than I am about the c-word.  All of you trying to defend this are just enabling hack comedy, and should stop.  We, as a society, are right to expect better than that.

At least no one in this thread was dumb enough to bring up the First Amendment-- proud of you Farkers!
2013-02-25 06:16:36 PM  
1 votes:

shut_it_down: YoungLochinvar: Well, I thought it was so obviously a satirical rip on the rampant (and basically socially acceptable) media misogyny that the intent couldn't possibly be missed... but then I read this thread...

Yeah, I second that.  I thought the outrage was that the use of the c-word was too far when "biatch" may have sufficed.  But it appears that most people think the Onion was actually just insulting her for shock value, which is just not what the Onion does.


No, that's not it at all. It doesn't matter why one writer at The Onion thought it was funny. It was an inappropriate joke using an inappropriate word. And yes some words are more offensive than others.

If the writer had used the N word instead would you still think it was funny? Women don't like the word c*nt for the same reason black people don't the N word, and why Jews don't like anti-Semitic slurs, and why gay people don't like homosexual slurs.

Why is this so hard to understand?
2013-02-25 04:54:07 PM  
1 votes:

Trocadero: someonelse: browntimmy: Doesn't bother me, but I also understand people with below average intelligence don't understand context and you have to worry about them when you have a lot of followers. I know someone's going to counter with "But a 9 year old won't understand context" so I'll go ahead and reply, "A 9 year old would also never find this quote unless someone deliberately showed her and likely doesn't understand what that word means anyway."

What is the context that makes it funny?

A nine year old kid who's been in one movie acting like a total, ultra diva, who gets on everyone's nerves. I thought it was mildly funny. Saying "she's kind of a diva" is plausible enough to be true, but calling her a c--t lets everyone know that it's a joke.


Nobody is saying she's acting like an ultra diva though. Just being from the Onion let's everyone know it's a joke. Everyone gets that it's a joke. The only question here are "was the joke funny?" The answer being "not to most people". A lot people are offering competing theories about what the supposed context was that allegedly made this joke funny from the juxtaposition thing (adorable child v. rudest name possible) to  "hyperbolic extension of already rampant media misogyny" making it quite clear that there was no clear context here.

Admit it, it was lame over-the-top joke that fell flat.

They can't all be A material.
2013-02-25 04:47:08 PM  
1 votes:
On one hand, The Onion is know for biting and sometimes offensive satire.

On the other hand, they called a 9 year old girl a c**t.

I feel that this is one of those times when The Onion went just a bit too far. At least they were willing to admit that they did, yanked the tweet, and apologized to the girl.

It might have been funny if Quvenzhane was in on the joke or was old enough to understand that it was satire, but this was not the case.
2013-02-25 04:06:16 PM  
1 votes:

Qellaqan: MNguy: Qellaqan: The seth macfarlane joke and the onion joke seem in poor humor to me for the same reason-- they sexualize a nine year old. I don't care if they're trying to make fun of Clooney... she's nine.

What if I called her a little farking brat?  Over the line?

It probably wouldn't be *nice*, but it wouldn't be upsetting either. Different insults have different meanings and different contexts. Depending on her actions, it could be an accurate description.

I wouldn't like someone calling Taylor Swift a coont. I don't like the word, and its only purpose seems too be for degrading women despite being a much-enjoyed body part. But she's kind of an asshole, and old enough to understand, so I wouldn't exactly care that much either.

Fair enough?


See, I thought is was some sort of a satirical meta-statement about the way we bad-mouth and denigrate young woman. Of course, no one but another 9-year-old would refer to a 9-year-old as the c-word.  It's a play on the way we're supposed to "hate" all successful young women. Now, take that to the extreme with the c-word instead of the b-word, which is perfectly [italic added to denote irony] okay when applied to anyone over 17, and apply it to a child instead of a young woman. Suddenly, it's very clear how twisted this is.

As I noted up-thread, this morning, there several things written about how hard it is to "hate" Jennifer Lawrence. I just kept thinking, "Why do you feel the need to try?" This Onion joke (which did fail...because if you have to explain the joke it failed) is the extreme version of this.
2013-02-25 03:54:42 PM  
1 votes:

MNguy: Qellaqan: The seth macfarlane joke and the onion joke seem in poor humor to me for the same reason-- they sexualize a nine year old. I don't care if they're trying to make fun of Clooney... she's nine.

What if I called her a little farking brat?  Over the line?


It probably wouldn't be *nice*, but it wouldn't be upsetting either. Different insults have different meanings and different contexts. Depending on her actions, it could be an accurate description.

I wouldn't like someone calling Taylor Swift a coont. I don't like the word, and its only purpose seems too be for degrading women despite being a much-enjoyed body part. But she's kind of an asshole, and old enough to understand, so I wouldn't exactly care that much either.

Fair enough?
2013-02-25 03:53:34 PM  
1 votes:

zarberg: FarkedOver: What if she really is a c*nt?

C*nts generally have warmth and depth, being from Hollywood, she probably has neither.


She's from Louisiana. And I really can't figure out what joke The Onion was trying to make. The kid isn't *anything* enough yet to be made fun of. It's not like calling Anne Hathaway a fat cow or something equally obviously sarcastic. It's baffling.
2013-02-25 03:39:35 PM  
1 votes:

the801: skimmed like 4 articles about this and saw nothing even hinting of an explanation as to what caused someone to think she's a coont. i have to imagine that she said or did something or was in some way coontish for anyone to have mentioned it.

/have no idea who she is; didn't pay attention to the oscars at all.


I just figured it's a riff on the way we're supposed to "hate" all successful young women. It's just taken to the extreme with the language and the very young-ness of the actress in question. This morning, I saw several things written about how hard it is to "hate" Jennifer Lawrence. I just kept thinking, "Why do you feel the need to try?"

That said, I am glad the Onion took it down and apologized because little kids don't have the ability to filter that kind of thing out.
2013-02-25 03:36:25 PM  
1 votes:
see you next tuesday
2013-02-25 03:22:10 PM  
1 votes:

FraggleStickCar: So the most obvious point of the Onion's joke was that the humor lay in just how horrible calling a 9 year old the c-word is, also alluding to the absurdity of a 9-year old being made publicly available for such a level of scrutiny in the first place.

I get that people are upset, but I'm only seeing a lot of "You can't call a 9 year old girl a c-word it's crossing a line"  What line, and why exactly is  that too far?

Is this just one of those times when all the people who don't know what The Onion is and have no sense of humor get incidentally alerted to its existence?


Using an overtly sexual anatomy slur in reference to a nine year old is crossing the line. Say anything about her actions, attitude, whatever but calling a child a c**t or a d**k before those body parts have matured (and become close to legal to use) is the line.
2013-02-25 03:14:37 PM  
1 votes:
I get what they were going for:  "It's funny because it's not true", with a generous dose of "Shocking!" for flavour.  But you can't hit a kid with that.  Glad they apologized.
2013-02-25 02:59:44 PM  
1 votes:
So the most obvious point of the Onion's joke was that the humor lay in just how horrible calling a 9 year old the c-word is, also alluding to the absurdity of a 9-year old being made publicly available for such a level of scrutiny in the first place.

I get that people are upset, but I'm only seeing a lot of "You can't call a 9 year old girl a c-word it's crossing a line"  What line, and why exactly is  that too far?

Is this just one of those times when all the people who don't know what The Onion is and have no sense of humor get incidentally alerted to its existence?
2013-02-25 02:56:30 PM  
1 votes:
Jesus Christ, between this and the 'retard' thread people sure are getting worked up over words today.

Here's an idea, don't tell the 9 year old someone called her a coont.  I doubt she reads The Onion.
2013-02-25 02:42:57 PM  
1 votes:
Lesson One:  IRONY.
2013-02-25 02:42:21 PM  
1 votes:

you are a puppet: You're just being an offended hipster.


Because saying that calling a 9 year old (who everybody already knew was gonna lose that night) a coont isn't funny is hip and edgy?

Are Onions on the belt coming back too?
2013-02-25 02:37:11 PM  
1 votes:
What if she really is a c*nt?
2013-02-25 02:34:56 PM  
1 votes:

G Love: Implying a sexual relationship between a 9 year old and a 50 year old is a joke, but calling her an offensive name is over the top. Got it.


You don't know how to add, do you? 9+16 = 25 which is well over the age of consent.  Clooney has 7 years to legally be with his ladies before they're too old.
2013-02-25 02:34:21 PM  
1 votes:

G Love: quatchi: Lando Lincoln: yanceylebeef: I thought it was funny.

I did too. I guess we're just two crass jerks. Or some other people don't understand that the Onion was not actually calling her a coont but was instead making fun of Seth McFarlane.

[quizzicaldog]

Seth said... "To give you an idea how young she is it'll be 16 years before she's too old for Clooney."

That's a joke.

What the Onion said was not a joke and then went well over the line and just kept going.

You're just making excuses and trying to look edgy hipsters.

"Crass jerks" comes a lot closer to the truth.


Implying a sexual relationship between a 9 year old and a 50 year old is a joke, but calling her an offensive name is over the top.  Got it.


Seth's joke was that at 25 she would be too old for him to date.

 Not that Clooney wanted to fark 9 year olds.

L2Read.
2013-02-25 02:32:34 PM  
1 votes:

FishyFred: I love that some people are saying things like "There's an apology, but it's too little, too late."

The tweet went up late Sunday night, came down an hour later, and the apology -- a real one, not "sorry you were offended" -- was online before lunch on Monday.

That's lightning fast.


"Yeah, but I only read about it today and by then I was mortified. Later in the article I read that an apology had been issued but I'd already read about this horrible derogatory comment so the damage had been done."

I believe that is the way of thinking those people have. It's totally illogical but they were late to the party so they have to verse their opinion while it still feels as though it matters.
2013-02-25 02:31:57 PM  
1 votes:
Boy, I'll bet that 9 year-old was mad when she read the Onion last night.
2013-02-25 02:31:45 PM  
1 votes:

MNguy: quatchi:

Seth said... "To give you an idea how young she is it'll be 16 years before she's too old for Clooney."

That's a joke.

You're drawing a pretty fine line there.  What some people find funny, others may not.


One is making fun of a grown man, the other is making fun of a 9-year old.
2013-02-25 02:21:53 PM  
1 votes:

the801: skimmed like 4 articles about this and saw nothing even hinting of an explanation as to what caused someone to think she's a coont. i have to imagine that she said or did something or was in some way coontish for anyone to have mentioned it.

/have no idea who she is; didn't pay attention to the oscars at all.


Is this post satire too?

I mean, if not, this analysis thoroughly and completely misses the point of the "joke".

No, she didn't do anything "coontish".  She did absolutely nothing that wasn't adorable and 9-year-old-child-like ... which is the very punchline of the joke.
2013-02-25 02:17:33 PM  
1 votes:
Number of comments on the TFA that it took for before someone tied this to Obama:  29.
2013-02-25 02:10:33 PM  
1 votes:
I thought it was funny. Its satire, and it was making fun of Hollywood and the entertainment industry, not the girl.
2013-02-25 02:10:14 PM  
1 votes:
Children should be at least 10 before tossed into the Hollywood 'meat grinder'.

She shouldn't be subjected to that sort of language and name calling, not in Hollywood.  Nope.

Should that sort of thing be encouraged?  No.  Yet, I've no doubt that she's already been subjected to much worse.
2013-02-25 01:49:51 PM  
1 votes:
Alright, who's next? [ image appears ] Oh, it's 9-year old Quvenzhané Wallis.  You think you can beat me?! "Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Wallis?" Also: The Alphabet called; they want theirletters back. Ka-bam!

Jennifer Lawrence, SNL Opening Monologue
2013-02-25 01:36:33 PM  
1 votes:
I can't decide if I thought it was funny or not.
2013-02-25 01:06:28 PM  
1 votes:

the801: skimmed like 4 articles about this and saw nothing even hinting of an explanation as to what caused someone to think she's a coont. i have to imagine that she said or did something or was in some way coontish for anyone to have mentioned it.

/have no idea who she is; didn't pay attention to the oscars at all.


I can kind of understand the joke they were trying to make.  It's right up there with "Mr. Roger's dreams of burying hookers in the desert."

But, they fell flat on their faces this time.  And, that's what happens when you just try too hard.
2013-02-25 12:50:10 PM  
1 votes:
Taking The Onion's talents for prediction into account, I'm now worried about Wallis's future.
2013-02-25 11:59:46 AM  
1 votes:
So if we wait about 9 years, it'll be a-okay then?
 
Displayed 54 of 54 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report