It’s now, oh, midnight-ish up here in Chez Broad, and I’ve been following with morbid fascination two posts on Jez (SHOCKING!) that my favie Moe wrote about condom-less sex. The original post was about an NPR segment calling said sex “the new engagement!”—an interesting premise, if you ask me—and the second an APOLOGY post for the first post because people read it as Moe singing the virtues of unprotected sex, and we’re not supposed to do that in this day and age. Only, the people didn’t like her apology, either, because of its flip tone.

The first thing I gotta say is to all the commenters who let everyone know—AGAIN—that this time was the LAST time they’d ever read Jez: We KNOW you don’t like Moe’s writing, and we KNOW you have your reasons because you tell us every damn time she posts something. If you’re going to go, KEEP YOUR DAMN WORD AND JUST FUCKING GO. Y’all are like the spurned party in a rotten relationship who keeps threatening to leave but NO ONE takes seriously because you keep coming back and repeating yourself (not that *I* have any experience with that whatsover, but ... (cough) ... and I mean the rotten relationship, not making dramatic pronouncements on Jez. I reFUSE to do that).

The other thing is this, and it’s in reference to the particular commenters who insist that Moe’s a role model via her position on a well-known Web site: A role model, by its definition, is something to which one aspires, but what if Moe doesn’t WANT anyone aspiring to be her and just wants to tell her truth? To me, “role model” signifies a lofty position that should be filled only by a specific type of person who I would say is almost beyond reproach, and that ain’t Moe, nor is it many people I know. So why should she have to be someone she’s not or doesn’t want to be? I know I sure as hell don’t want to be a role model; poster child’s more my speed, anyway, and I’m good at that.

And they’re STILL at it over there. Talk about a mob mentality. Man.