comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

Things We Saw Today

Things We Saw Today: Grumpy Cat Made Out Of Gingerbread


But how can you be grumpy if you’re made out of delicious gingerbread?!? (via Nerdalicious

  • The Iowa Supreme Court recently made a unanimous decision that an employer was well within his rights to fire his employee because she was too attractive. Or should I say, she provided an “irresistible attraction,” and both he and his wife felt her presence threatened their marriage. Read more at The Frisky.
  • We figured it would happen eventually, Marvel is getting the Star Wars comic license from Dark Horse. (via Geekosystem)

The first image from Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg’s The World’s End. (via Bleeding Cool)

  • It’s a Studio 60 reunion! Sort of. Bradley Whitford and Matthew Perry will appear on NBC’s comedy, Go On. Personally, I’m waiting for Whitford to arrive on Newsroom. (via The Hollywood Reporter)
  • The National Museum of Mathematics is now open in New York City! (via Yahoo)

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

TAGS: | | | | |


  • http://twitter.com/ChannelDiza Chanel Diaz

    “The Iowa Supreme Court recently
    made a unanimous decision that an employer was well within his rights to fire
    his employee because she was too attractive. Or should I say, she provided an
    “irresistible attraction,” and both he and his wife felt her presence
    threatened their marriage. Read more at The Frisky.”

    

W-wh-WHAT?

    

http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-22/beware-your-boss-can-fire-your-flirty-ass/



    How is this Not DISCRIMINATION? The
    article even mention the Case would be the Same even without ‘Flirting!’ They
    just Legally Allowed Employers to Fire, most likely women, with this
    “She’s too pretty to work! Oh, and she’s a WOMAN.”

    

I read the part talked about ‘The
    Man’s,’”bulge in his pants was a sign her clothes were too
    revealing…” *Barfs*



    The Fired female should Counter-Sue for
    Sexual Harassment and Discrimination! I’ve heard cases where
    “unattractive” women Sued for being Fired before, so why not the
    opposite Scenario?


    

I guess it’s not too surprising since
    just a couple of The Mary Sues ago, it was Mentioned there was a Southern
    Californian Judge trying to actually DEFEND the RAPIST….

  • http://twitter.com/ChannelDiza Chanel Diaz

    “The Iowa Supreme Court recently made a unanimous decision that an employer was well within his rights to fire his employee because she was too attractive. Or should I say, she provided an “irresistible attraction,” and both he and his wife felt her presence threatened their marriage. Read more at The Frisky.”

    

W-wh-WHAT?

    

http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-22/beware-your-boss-can-fire-your-flirty-ass/



    How is this Not DISCRIMINATION? The Frisky even mention the Case would be the Same even without ‘Flirting!’ They just Legally Allowed Employers to Fire, most likely women, with this “She’s too pretty to work! Oh, and she’s a WOMAN.”

    

I read the part talked about ‘The Man’s,’”bulge in his pants was a sign her clothes were too revealing…” *Barfs*



    The Fired female should Counter-Sue for Sexual Harassment and Discrimination! I’ve heard cases where “unattractive” women Sued for being Fired before, so why not the
    opposite Scenario?


    

I guess it’s not too surprising since
    just a couple of The Mary Sues ago, it was Mentioned there was a Southern
    Californian Judge trying to actually DEFEND the RAPIST….