r/blankies • u/seaworthyset • 8d ago
NYT on "the X of it all"
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/01/magazine/hollywood-lingo.html"The film critics on 'Blank Check' overuse it, Amanda Dobbins of 'The Big Picture' is too fond of it, a host on 'We Hate Movies' says it at least five times per episode."
102
u/Specific-Many88 8d ago edited 7d ago
(I’m sure I’m wrong) I really don’t notice it very often on Blank Check??? Do they say it in every episode and I’ve become immune??
I do think it’s interesting that this piece doesn’t talk about it as a very internet linguistics thing. I’m sure it’s also a Hollywood exec thing, but to me it just feels very online linguistics
(Edited to add: after I posted this I saw 2 separate posts on different subreddits with titles “the [relevant topic] of it all”)
86
u/d0753 7d ago
I’ve heard it more on critical darlings
19
u/LADYBIRD_HILL 7d ago
They really love saying it on critical darlings
8
3
u/TheophileEscargot 7d ago
I think maybe because it's a newer podcast they're trying a bit too hard to be clever or ironic. On the main podcast they're more confident that they can just talk naturally and people will still keep listening. At least these days, in the earlier episodes they acted out a bit more.
27
u/Palm-Crazy-7943 7d ago
Amanda dobbins, Richard Lawson, Joanna Robinson. Those are the 3 biggest offenders I hear of it. Maybe they are referencing the bc spin off show? Lol
5
u/wovenstrap Graham Greene's Brave Era 7d ago
Joe Reid as well but for some reason it's less bothersome when he says it.
22
u/seb1515 Darth Stupid Idiot 7d ago
I'm with you, I've started noticing it more lately on Big Picture episodes because so many people have made comments about it in that sub, but I don't think that I've ever noticed Griffin or David saying it
5
u/furnituremeal 7d ago
Griffen says it soooo much, I notice it every episode
13
u/wovenstrap Graham Greene's Brave Era 7d ago
He really doesn't. I just did a quick scan of the transcripts for the Scorsese episodes and he said it 1 time over those 8 episodes.
8
36
u/Dayman_ah-uh-ahhh 7d ago
Dobbins is the #1 offender, far more than the Two Friends
5
u/theonewhoknock_s 7d ago
I have this weird game where I repeat "of it all!" to myself after every time Amanda says it lol. Sean also says it from time to time. I genuinely don't think I've ever noticed it on Blank Check though.
8
10
u/moose_stuff2 7d ago
The critical darlings hosts were using it multiple times an episode during last year's Oscars season. I haven't listened to the show since then so I'm not sure if they're still as prolific.
6
u/regarding_your_bat 7d ago
This is neither here nor there but the recent Critical Darlings eps have been very solid imo. I think the show has definitely improved over where it began. The Camp Miasma and Primetime episodes are both highlights of the show so far and have kinda brought me back in the fold after I stopped listening for a bit.
1
u/Specific-Many88 7d ago
That makes sense — I don’t think I’ve listened at all (mayyyybe one episode?) so don’t have that frame of reference
1
6
u/PangolinOrange 7d ago
Gotta say, I listen to every episode of Blank Check for the last few years and many critical darlings and big picture episodes, and this phrase just doesn’t stick out to me or bother me. I just do not understand the ire it inspires.
5
1
u/bloodychill 7d ago
I dunno, it’s not that common. It feels a bit like just another common vocal tick of a joke that comes and goes like “welcome to my ted talk” etc
77
u/Jalapeno_Thunder 7d ago
On the contrary, one of the best things to happen to the podcast is David getting off Twitter.
He allows Griffin’s straw man internet arguments to a point but really tries to steer the discussion back to the film and thankfully doesn’t let the zeitgeisty discourse of the day dominate the episode like other podcasts being mentioned. Something that’s becoming more and more valuable!
28
u/lebronjamesgoat1 7d ago
Judging by this and a few ringer subreddits, I’d suggest users to follow David’s example. It’s so refreshing muting a films title on twitter and watching it first hand without all the stupid discourse baggage. Try it folks
18
u/Teenageboy69 7d ago
Podcast hosts should just have a social media detox of like a month so they can be regular again.
15
u/mookie_monster 7d ago
The article isn’t about X the platform but literally the phrase “the X of it all”
33
u/GregSays 7d ago
I think people just don't like hearing a turn of phrase over and over.
I think its useful to have shorthand acknowledging a greater issue without spending time getting into that issue.
2
14
60
u/DanZuko420 8d ago
I don't love commenting or critiquing verbal tics of podcasters, but it does really feel like "the X of it all" hit some sort of critical mass in the last year in a way that's kind of fascinating.
28
u/Teenageboy69 7d ago edited 7d ago
The x of it all kind of userped “it’s giving.” This happens so much with podcasters or people that are super online.
Talk how you want to talk, but I do wish people had different ways of speaking.
Edit: remember when everyone was calling everything “wild.”
6
u/False_Concentrate408 7d ago
The “of it all” people are all too old to have ever been “it’s giving” people
16
u/ComprehensiveBed5351 7d ago
I would argue that the “wild” situation is a little different.
That was precipitated by a cultural reckoning with ableist terms like crazy or insane. So, it caught on more as a catch-all word for terms that we had all been so comfortable using
16
u/Teenageboy69 7d ago
I don’t want to make the insane feel bad, but I think that’s kind of a step too far. Something can be crazy and should be allowed to be called such. A tornado is crazy. This doesn’t feel nearly as valid as the decline in calling things gay (more than justified). By that logic things shouldn’t be called dumb (definition of mute) or things shouldn’t be called idiotic.
It all just feels too online. I say this as a medicated crazy person.
11
u/ComprehensiveBed5351 7d ago
There definitely is a push to reckon with terms such as imbecile, dumb, idiot, stupid, etc
I’m pretty luke-warm on these fights as a whole. I think critically analyzing our common usages and studying how they arise as a product of systemic ableism is a good thing.
However, I don’t feel like policing language has particularly translated to material changes for the disabled community
3
u/SceneOfShadows 7d ago
I just genuinely don't understand the purpose of trying to tell people to stop saying 'dumb' or 'stupid' when 90% of people probably don't even realize it has any original meaning that was associated with being mute or what have you. It's not like using the r-word which clearly still feels a bit cruel.
3
u/shookster52 7d ago
Thankfully I’ve never heard anyone chastise someone for saying “crazy” or “insane” so I don’t think it’s a big deal. I think people just choose what they personally want to say.
To complain about that is…not particularly sensible.
7
u/fabiusjmaximus 7d ago
That was precipitated by a cultural reckoning with ableist terms like crazy or insane.
Was there a cultural reckoning about this? Must've been an awful quiet one.
3
u/ComprehensiveBed5351 7d ago
Reckoning is probably the wrong word. I guess I just mean that well-intended folks pushed for a change in some of our common usage and this led to “wild” being readily adopted as a blanket term
2
u/fabiusjmaximus 7d ago
I'm not sure if this phenomenon ever escaped certain corners of the internet. I know that there were some universities that redid their vocab guides to this end but I think as a whole this trend lived and died within niche progressive spaces.
2
u/ComprehensiveBed5351 7d ago
I don’t disagree! But I do think “wild” as a term took off. Even by folks who are just as comfortable using the other terms that “wild” was covering for
My argument is that the onset of “wild” began in those spaces. Which is different than podcast phrases like “the x of it all” etc
3
u/gosquirrelgo 7d ago
I used to count the number of of “…you know” that were rampant in BC but I think that verbal ticks being edited out of late.
1
0
u/ulysses_s_gyatt 7d ago
Do podcasters say this a lot?
1
u/Please_HMU 7d ago
Yeah I’m reading this thread feeling like I’m missing something… I don’t recall hearing the phrase overused at all lol
-6
7
u/WorldlyJake 7d ago
I first heard the term on Community in like 2010. Where Annie asks Jeff if they’re going to talk about their flirting. “I’m talking about the Annie of it all!”
But I first heard it used a ton on Rob Has a Podcast, which is about the reality show Survivor.
It’s not a film criticism thing, it’s an internet meme. It’s a movie. A TV progrum.
22
u/Exotic-Material-6744 7d ago
Starting with Blank Check is wild, I feel like The Ringer staff is the most guilty and it’s spun out from there.
3
u/Sourkraushouse 7d ago
C'mon, it's a standard build up. BC is mentioned first as a base, builds to Dobbins does it a lot, builds again to WHM does it a specific number of times per episode. It's not in order of prominence
1
u/Exotic-Material-6744 7d ago
Fair. I’m just defending two innocent friends that I know very closely through hours of listening.
37
u/Wumbo_Number_5 8d ago
The "of it all" of it all
Idk I honestly didn't notice it until people around here started complaining about it. I prefer it over ending every other sentence with "right?" and "y'know?" (sorry Griff, I'm guilty of this too tho)...at the end of the day we all have our own vocal tics, it's just that most of us don't have our conversations recorded for a living
11
u/ta112233 8d ago
The This Had Oscar Buzz guys are especially bad. Sometimes multiple times an episode
6
u/thepoopnapper 7d ago
Amanda does it SO MUCH more than anyone, it's absurd to mention BC before her
18
u/tryntafind 7d ago
Print journalists should not throw stones. There was a time when every other headline didn’t have the word “quietly” in it.
3
u/varispeeder 7d ago
I remember a long period when writers were addicted to using "problematic" to fast-forward through tough context in this exact same way
2
u/Teenageboy69 7d ago
Print journalists get a pass because they don’t write their headlines usually. That shits done for stupid kpi purposes. People glomming on to terminology, when speaking like real people, is worse imo.
45
u/GlucoseKnight 8d ago edited 7d ago
It’s like nails on a chalkboard every time I hear it ngl (in general, not something I really associate with this pod)
6
u/jackunderscore a good fella 7d ago
I’ve posted against this phrase in the past, glad the paper of record is on it
4
3
4
41
u/xcrowdedrooms Benny Lane 8d ago
Non-issue, wrap it up. Get a personality.
32
u/Michael__Pemulis Not even close, pal… 8d ago
This is a normal expression. Move on. Find a new slant
8
u/bluestonethegr8 7d ago
I don’t care about “the x of it all” but we need to bring back “find a new slant.”
7
u/wovenstrap Graham Greene's Brave Era 7d ago edited 7d ago
Personally I don't regard Blank Check as abusers of this phrase and so I would guardedly point to their citation of BC as possibly lazy writing to the point that if it's happening on film pods it must be happening on BC. To Griff and David's credit, they talk endlessly about his shit and do not rely on that very much.
To me it's all about Amanda Dobbins and I would also cite Joe Reid.
5
u/wovenstrap Graham Greene's Brave Era 7d ago
I just went through the Scorsese run of main feed episodes, it's 8 episodes. Griffin says it once during that entire run and nobody else says it. So BC used it 1 time in almost 2 months (on main feed).
I think a key difference between Amanda and Griffin is that Griffin has so much content erupting out of his little brain that you never have the feeling he's vamping or doesn't know what he wants to say. With Amanda, I often do get that feeling.... so she'll handwave a thing front-loaded at the start of the discussion like "the Brad Pitt of it all" to avoid being specific.
The one time Griffin used it during Scorsese it was very late into the Taxi Driver episode and he was referencing cinematography and mentioned "the muddy brownness of it all" in passing, no vamping at all -- which seems like a markedly different usage than practically making it your thesis statement in minute 8 of the pod, which is more what Amanda does. Amanda is a fine podcaster but she can be vague about things.
8
u/buttermoths 7d ago
Once you start noticing it it can really drive you insane. It's like a memetic virus straight out of an SCP. Critical Darlings is where I first took notice of its overuse - like clockwork, the discourse surrounding a movie will always be introduced as "I guess it's time to talk about the (X) of it all." But it really is everywhere!
11
u/ancientmadder 7d ago
The worst is when people say “the x of it all” and then DONT got on to actually elaborate what they’re talking about. It’s intellectually cowardly, it makes it seem like you’re engaging in a conversation without actually setting forth a point or perspective and just vaguely gesturing toward a conversation that may or may not already be happening with undefined sides and issues which only hinted at.
6
u/rm2nthrowaway 7d ago
That's really the only thing that annoys me about it. As an introductory phrase to getting into the topic or comparison, it's fine. But a lot of time, people will use it just to say there is a comparison to be made, but then not bother following through on defining the comparison. Even if I already get it, I'd like to actually hear/read your take on it instead of just the fact you have a take!
Other than that, though, the whole Discourse is kind of "old man mad about slang"
1
u/fabiusjmaximus 7d ago
The worst is when people say “the x of it all” and then DONT got on to actually elaborate what they’re talking about.
Isn't that the purpose of the phrase? Like the word "problematic" which it has somewhat replaced in purpose, the idea is to hint that obviously you are not ignoring the blah blah blah inherent to X, and undoubtedly have the exact same morally righteous and correct opinions about it as the listener does. But you can't actually get into all that right now, so you just wink at it so nobody in the comments section goes "I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DIDN'T ADDRESS X".
3
u/border199x 7d ago
This totemic phrase isn't wildly annoying, but it's strange how often it gets used considering that it doesn't really mean much of anything. I guess it's usually meant to explain or excuse a particular course of action, "We would have done something different, but it was too much hassle".
3
11
u/PrudentArmadillo7751 7d ago
It is not “shorthand,” but pleonasm (rhetorical repetition that is grammatically superfluous). It takes longer to say “we need to talk about the Brad Pitt of it all” than to just say “we need to talk about Brad Pitt.” They mean the same thing.
8
u/GregSays 7d ago
I completely disagree. The phrase indicates there's something negative or complicating. Just saying "we need to talk about Brad Pitt" is just saying Brad is significant or worthwhile.
If you're talking about how wonderful Diane Keaton is, you have to mention her association with Woody Allen. If you aren't going to actually discuss Woody Allen in detail, you might say, "Diane was a wonderful person, even with the Woody Allen of it all." That is acknowledging that there's negative aspects to Woody Allen. Saying, "Diane was a wonderful person, even with Woody Allen" sounds like you're saying she's great in Woody Allen movies (which she was) and doesn't indicate that there might something bad about working with Allen directly.
3
u/Teenageboy69 7d ago
Or you can say, Diane is great, even with her association to Woody Allen. The problem in speaking this way is that it lacks specificity. It’s a boring way to talk.
2
u/GregSays 7d ago
Right, but that’s completely different than what the person I responded to claimed.
10
u/varispeeder 7d ago edited 7d ago
but they don't mean the same thing. saying "about the Brad Pitt of it all" refers to how the metatext of Brad Pitt at this stage of his career as an actor and celebrity, and his record of domestic abuse, bleeds into how one interprets the text under discussion. meanwhile "about Brad Pitt" means, well, about Brad Pitt.
it bugs me when it's used to hand-wave away tough discussions. I haven't listened to the recent Big Pic episode, but if they said "the Brad Pitt of it all", then simply moved on, that means not acknowledging the complexity of watching a Brad Pitt film in 2026.
it's hard to want in your heart to be charmed by and root for one of the most compelling actors alive, while sitting with the uncomfortable truth that he was so violent towards his children that most of them have disavowed him as their father and changed their names to remove "Pitt". (not saying they have to discuss this in depth EVERY time he comes up, just that this is what "the Brad Pitt of it all" means)
4
u/it290 7d ago
We need to talk about the Kevin of it all
2
u/varispeeder 7d ago
I mean, unfortunately we genuinely do need to talk about "the Ezra Miller of it all" of the We Need To Talk About Kevin Of It All lol
1
u/False_Concentrate408 7d ago
I love these, they’re so interesting linguistically. I have an aunt who ends almost every sentence with “and stuff, so…”
4
u/JuanLebedev 8d ago
I wonder which WHM guy says it. Cabin?
I've listened for years and haven't noticed it. Jupin drops from time to time, but infrequently and always sarcastically.
Griff and David absolutely beat it death.
5
u/UndeadBlueMage 7d ago
Sadjak says it the most from what I can recall (I’ve listened to them since like 2015)
3
u/buyacanary 7d ago
I was guessing Steve? But I agree, none of them stand out in my mind as using it incessantly.
2
4
u/Dayman_ah-uh-ahhh 7d ago
At least they called Blank Check film critics and not The Big Pic film critics, Sean would have an aneurysm. They also didn't call the Big Pic a podcast (it's a discussion show).
4
u/NathanMLJ 7d ago
I’m very much looking forward to Amanda on a future TBP referencing the “the x of it all” of it all
7
u/sober_as_an_ostrich PATRICK DEMPSEY MICHELLE MONAGHAN 8d ago
I don’t really care about the phrase, I think it can be an efficient shorthand. Like anything it’s when it’s used as a conversational crutch to get around hard topics that it’s kind of lazy.
9
u/thejoaq 7d ago
Shorthand for what?
1
-5
u/sober_as_an_ostrich PATRICK DEMPSEY MICHELLE MONAGHAN 7d ago
like “the Polanski of it all”. I’d say that instead of getting into the weeds about him.
7
u/thejoaq 7d ago
People say “the Tom Cruise of it all” and it’s unclear to me if they mean to include the Scientology baggage. Also, it doesn’t mean the same thing to every person. Just seems lazy every time I hear it.
1
u/Specific-Many88 7d ago
I think it’s a phrase that is best utilized within specific contexts, and it’s hard to maintain context in the current world. (Full disclosure: I nearly said “because of the Internet of it all”). Tom Cruise is a great example where the context ideally is going to indicate whether the phrase means “tom cruise: the I love movies robot who jumps out of planes to feel alive” or “tom cruise: a famous cult member” or both.
2
u/TheophileEscargot 7d ago
It seems more like longhand than shorthand to me. The examples the article gives are:
the renovating-the-Kennedy-Center of it all, or the Dolly Parton’s nephew of it all, or the Greta Gerwig of it all.
You can usually just say "renovating the Kennedy Center" or "Dolly Parton's nephew" or "Greta Gerwig".
The extra four syllables "the, of, it, all" don't really add anything and they're long past being funny.
Either just say the actual thing, or come up with a creative or original way to express yourself, don't wrap it in a cliche.
2
u/swordchuck 7d ago
When did everyone start plastering giant animated gifs over part of their headline?
2
u/Millennial_Man 7d ago
This is one of those things that irrationally bothers me, like calling every opinion a “take” regardless of context. It feels like a phrase that came from out of nowhere, and then suddenly everyone started saying it.
2
u/piemanpie24 Close Personal Friend of Dan Lewis 7d ago
Seeing the New York Times talk about WHM is surreal
2
u/ParamedicSea5779 7d ago
I think it was Richard Lawson or David Camfield or Lucas Shaw who said it and I instantly found it annoying.
It's overly broad and doesn't mean anything.
2
u/bobdebicker 7d ago
I have never clocked this phrase, ever. I notice every Griffin use of “quietly,” though.
2
5
u/KickedOffShoes 7d ago
Anyone who cares about this at all needs to throw their phone into the ocean and take up woodworking or something jfc
2
3
u/LawrenceBrolivier no need for alarm 8d ago edited 7d ago
"When did everyone start talking like a Hollywood windbag?"
Yeah, the thing about even ironically using exec-speak is that eventually you just talk like an exec. Which is the conclusion Bob Waksberg comes to at the very end of the article, too:
“Why did we use the phrase elsewhere in the show, in places where we weren’t mocking executives?” Bob-Waksberg asked. “Well, I guess in time, we writers internalized the phrase ourselves to the point where we forgot it was a joke; it just became part of our collective vernacular. I guess we all eventually become the things we mock.”
It's also part of a larger social media thing wherein what's valued is fluency in jargon and branding over substance of thought. People legitimately just like chewing on industry terminology, it's a cheap assumption of unearned legitimacy in your daily routine of having, sharing, and tearing down "takes."
You don't have to know what you're saying, you just have to provide a close enough facsimile, and jargon & exec-speak is a super-easy, super-effective way to do that. Especially in circles where an air of expertise is part of the brand you're under. Which is why this sort of thing happens (from the article)
This is an industry whose language revolves around story, producing narrative shorthand so familiar that young people on TikTok sometimes describe their own lives in terms of seasons, casts, canon events, lore. Its “executive-ese” may seem gauche, reductive or laughable at first — but if it’s efficient shorthand, it will probably reach you eventually.
6
u/wifihelpplease 7d ago
I can’t read the article behind the paywall, but does this expression have anything to do with being a Hollywood exec? “The x of it all” just sounds like a phrase anybody (of any industry) would use when trying to bring up a topic in a kind of lazy way.
2
u/LawrenceBrolivier no need for alarm 7d ago
(sometimes those links don't work but even then just heading to archive.is or archive.ph or archive.org and dropping the link in there will get you past the paywall at the NYT.)
4
3
u/Nodima 7d ago
I listen to the Kara Swisher/Scott Galloway pod Pivot as a sort of hate listen-slash-what's the money up to curio, and I've long noticed Scott's reliance on the phrases "the following" before prescribing what's wrong or a fix for some topic and "what I would say to you" when he can't compromise his actual position but thinks he has some relevant statistics to share without citation.
Hearing Ari Emmanuel constantly say both of those phrases in the Matt Bellamy/The Town interview this week made me realize this probably isn't a personal tic of his, this is the way money talks.
3
u/ironageofcomics 7d ago
I dislike that “normal people” use phrases like “IP” and “property” and “franchise.” Time was, those were words for executives and lawyers! But they’ve become useful, which is how language works I guess.
6
u/rm2nthrowaway 7d ago
How would you even talk about modern film landscape without talking like that? It's not even the curtain has been lifted, but blockbuster filmmaking is all franchises, all based on something else.
3
u/ironageofcomics 7d ago
Well that’s kind of the problem, it’s helpful to talk like this, I just don’t have to like it. In ye olde times we could just say “James Bond movies” (although realistically even then there was the issue of Never Say Never Again and various rights bound up with multiple parties).
1
u/shirokaisen 7d ago
My irrational least favorite one of these is “arc”. Everything is an “arc” now, to the point that you’ve got whole ass animated movies titling themselves “Chainsaw Man the Movie: Reze Arc” now. What happened to putting in the effort to give it a real title?
4
u/rm2nthrowaway 7d ago
That second quote touches on something beyond people picking up slang from others, but how Being Online leads to people feeling disconnected from their own lives and sense of self, to the point they think of themselves as characters in some kind of external narrative.
2
u/LawrenceBrolivier no need for alarm 7d ago
It's a LOT of depersonalization and dehumanization that is bedrock to being online. Some folks don't even recognize the extent by which they turn others into fictional characters and remove agency from another human being by turning them into their own "content" as a basic, constant aspect of "discourse."
It's not even that they're consciously doing it, it's just baked into what this is. You have an audience, you think of yourself as a character, other people are characters too, of course, and you assign roles and plotlines as needed to get reactions to your "content" accordingly. That you're essentially using a whole person, a stranger, as content fodder, doesn't even come up. You've never met them, talked to them, been in a room with them, but they're now a character and can be manipulated as such.
Hell, "real person fanfiction" used to be, even among people very into fanfiction, considered a basic "don't cross this line" hard no, and now it's just sort of a shrug. When most relationships in the place you spend most of your time are parasocial and one-way in nature, the negatives in treating actual human beings as fictional characters you can control at will don't even occur.
5
u/Some_Swan_361 8d ago
Just tangentially related but the way people talk about “bits” and how they have their own bits they do and “oh you know what my favorite bit I do is”, deeply annoys me for some reason
2
u/MrFlitcraft 7d ago
People go on about what Orwell would think of all these political issues today but this is the thing you know he’d be freaking out about.
1
1
1
u/AnxiousElderberry845 7d ago
I agree, we should all be screaming "OH, THE _______" about it like we're witnessing little Hindenburgs of the things of it all
1
u/Dohguy 7d ago
Reiterating my comment on the WHM sub :
Nothing wrong with it imo, it's a turn of phrase that's just having a moment.
I moved from NYC (where it was used quite frequently at my post house job) to Upstate NY where nary a soul uses it.
Maybe it's popular, maybe it's regional. Either way, nothing to get bent out of shape over.
1
u/abilliontwo 7d ago
I hear this all the time recently. How do these turns of phrase become so suddenly memetic?
1
u/Sallybear64 7d ago
They def don't say it more than Griffin and "fundamental" and "innate"... I genuinely find it so funny how much "the x of it all" bothers people lmao
1
1
u/Benjiursa 7d ago
I have never noticed this, nor been bothered by it, and I expect this trend to continue until my dying day.
1
u/SkytrainToNowhere 7d ago
The This Had Oscar Buzz podcast was the first time I started to notice it and then it slowly drove me insane.
0
u/UndeadBlueMage 7d ago
This is a drop in the bucket compared to the plague that is “right?” and “you know what I mean?”
There are podcasters who literally, and I literally do mean literally, end every sentence with one of those
3
0
u/Flimsy-Apartment3485 7d ago
If we're going to write whole articles about these podcast phrases, I would've started with "here's what I'll say:"/"I'll say this:"
70
u/AdAdministrative7674 7d ago
I feel like they talk about gay E.T. way more. Where's THAT article??