i feel like she was underwhelmed by how little of a queen bee she was in this floor.
and, also, coming up right smack dab against the very personal family drama that is rooming with Sal.
but like also she’s had bigger things to worry about than getting moved
TheAnonymousGuy
“Sir” said it himself. Moving billie was basically a power play to keep hold over ruth and keep any outside influences from helping her, just like back home with that guy and Howard.
but like this is also the price of getting to continue to date Ruth for Billie. because Billie has no intention of moving meaning she can’t date her girlfriend.
i don’t know what Clint’s contingency plan was for this, but Billie’s a very determined girl and he does not have any authority over her
Tgape
More specifically, according to the likely dormitory rules, once Billie moves, there’s no problem with her dating Ruth. So she can officially move, then move back in with Ruth once and for all. No problem. I don’t see why they’re making a big deal of it. The rule is really there to protect Billie and ensure she has somewhere to go if she needs to get away from Ruth.
Roborat
Yup, that is my read too, if she is moved, there is no need to keep things secret anymore.
Liliet
^^^ this
Temperaryobsessor
Of course he said it himself. With a few words even if Ruth knows objectively that its what the school needs to do to give her permission to date Billie it now feels like their being torn apart.
It’s not like it’s a punishment. It’s explicitly so that she and Ruth can continue their relationship without breaking any rules. Was she that attached to her room? She barely used it anyway.
Heavensrun
Sal -is- going to have to worry about her new roommate finding out she’s Amazi-girl, tho.
She’s being moved, not banned from the floor, so she’ll just have a commute to participate in the plot now.
Kryss LaBryn
Not even much of a commute; now she can openly sleep over with Ruth whenever she likes. She can even bring clothes over for a few night’s stay.
As long as she still does laundry in the other wing, and maintains that as her “official” address, I personally don’t see any reason why she shouldn’t be able to sleep over pretty much all the time–although I guess that “Guests can only stay for four nights” thing means she’d need to crash back at home every fifth night, which isn’t too big a compromise for being able to stop hiding the relationship. 😀
Donald Trump could literally pardon himself and everyone involved for the Russia scandal and the GOP-dominated Congress wouldn’t lift a finger.
Eat at Arby’s.
TheStranger
If the President pardons himself for crimes committed, does the Congress have the Constitutional authority to impeach for those crimes after the fact?
That would be the Constitutional crisis to end all crises, I think.
(Eat at Arby’s.)
Reltzik
Impeachment is a bureaucratic procedure and not a criminal prosecution. Just like if you commit a crime your boss can fire you for it and that’s separate from whether you get put on trial by the law. But because Trump’s party controls a majority, they’d let him get away with it, and new precedent would be established.
Eat at Arby’s.
thejeff
“he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”
Granted, the courts could throw that out. But he basically also owns the Supreme Court, so
Deanatay
Except that President Ford pardoned ex-President Nixon, so that isn’t true.
thejeff
Technically, Nixon wasn’t impeached. He resigned when it became apparent the House would impeach him and the Senate would convict. Ford pardoned him to avoid any criminal trials following his resignation.
As I read it though, even if he been impeached Ford could have done the same thing (or Nixon himself could have, before his removal), but that would only have affected criminal proceedings.
I think the point is that the President cannot use the pardon power to prevent removal by impeachment – either of himself or others. He can use it to remove criminal penalties, even in cases that also involved impeachment.
Tarmaniel
Impeachment isn’t a criminal trial, Congress can impeach for literally any reason. All impeachment does is remove you from office, it doesn’t send you to prison.
If Trump were to be impeached, he could theoretically then be prosecuted for any crimes he committed as President, but unless some hard evidence of the Russia collusion turns up there really aren’t any at this point. “Trump obstructed justice” is fairly dumb in the abstract, Trump literally can not commit the crime of obstruction of justice no matter what he does, as he’s the executive and has absolute authority over what the Justice Department investigates. Congress can impeach him for “obstruction of justice,” but that’s totally meaningless in an actual criminal trial because Congress can impeach him because they don’t like his tie color.
hof1991
Nope, the Justice Department doesn’t work for the president. They take an oath of office, but to the consitution, not the president. Firing those who are investigating you is a crime. That Congress is complicit in the crime doesn’t make it not a crime, one that he can go to jail for. Just not while he is still in office. And everyone short of him can go to jail for assisting him.
Schol-R-LEA
Keep in mind, one of the reasons that the Clinton trail stalled, even after he was impeached, was because Larry Flynt offered up to $1 million a pop for dirt on every GOP senator who voted for the impeachment. According to him, by the end of the year he had enough material to send not only them, but every single Senator and Rep, along with Clinton and everyone in his Cabinet, to jail for life.
This was almost certainly an idle boast, but that threat, along with the large number of other folks digging into things on both sides of the aisle, was a significant factor in scaring off not just that proceeding, but the current investigation as well (as a lot of the same people who were in Congress 20 years ago still hold office).
Schol-R-LEA
(Of course, dirt – or at least things that are ‘dirty’ – is something Flynt specialized in, so maybe…)
There were other factors, of course, and that wasn’t the biggest one; the real kicker was that the impeachment vote was so narrow that the GOP leaders weren’t sure they could carry a conviction, which keep in mind would have been tried by the Supreme Court with Congress as the jury. Still, there are plenty of people who know where the bodies are buried.
Getting 500 career criminals to convict one of their own? Not easy. Could they do it with an alleged (but not really in any real way) outsider like Trump? Uh… actually, that’s even less likely. Too many toes to step on for anyone’s liking (Trump is in Construction… think about who the people are who keep bankrolling him after he threw away more than twice as much as he inherited, and are able to keep up the illusion of his nonexistent status as a billionare). Basic survival – not just political, but actual staying alive survival – trumps political partisanship (pardon the pun).
begbert2
Wait wait wait – did you just (strongly) imply that Trump would put out mob hits on any congressmen who dared to participate in a trial against him?
How can something sound both batshit paint-eating insane and strangely plausible at the same time?
PlainMarie
Well, that is depressing. I’d like to think at least half of my senators and reps would not sink to that level to get where they are. Or one of my local reps who I think is aiming at the Senate for someday.
Deanatay
Unfortunately, ‘both batshit paint-eating insane and strangely plausible at the same time’ pretty much describes the entire Trump presidency.
Marsh Maryrose
And if President Trump were impeached and removed from office, President Pence would probably offer him a preemptive pardon. And if Pence were also impeached and removed from office, President Ryan would probably offer him a preemptive pardon too.
And yes, President Paul Ryan is a possibility. Eat at Arby’s.
Schol-R-LEA
Actually, it doesn’t even do that; it just removes the official privilege of immunity from prosecution. Removal from office would have to come after an actual conviction, and then would require a separate vote. I seem to recall that at least some Congresscritters have continued to hold their elected positions after being impeached and convicted.
thejeff
I don’t think that’s a separate vote, though I’m not 100% sure. Near as I can tell, a conviction means removal. There may be a separate vote to bar them from holding (any?) office again. It’s possible that’s what you’re thinking off.
Near as I can tell, no Congresscritters have been impeached as Congresscritters. One Judge, Alcee Hastings, was impeached and subsequently won a seat in the House.
hof1991
If the president is part of a conspiracy (money laundering) then he can not pardon his co-conspirators. Once he is notified that he is under investigation, he is not allowed to pardon those that conspired with him. He is, he is and he can’t. Even Pence, who may be part of the consiracy, may not be able to pardon him.
With Ford and Nixon, Ford stayed out of everything which then allowed him to pardon Nixon.
Schol-R-LEA
IIRC, it wasn’t so much that he stayed out of it, as he wasn’t there for it in the first place. He succeeded Agnew (who resigned over a different scandal) after the events that led to the investigation, (I’m not sure, but he might even have taken office after the investigation began – under his own auspices as Speaker of the House).
Woobie
Where is the pardon limited like that?
thejeff
It’s not, as far as I know. Other than by tradition, which no longer applies.
The President can use his executive authority to halt or interfere with investigations under the Department of Justice, even if they’re aimed at him or his close associates. It was assumed that if this was done inappropriately Congress would assert its authority and impeach him for that abuse of power. Checks and balances. A political remedy for a political problem.
Everything you do to keep yourself alive is staving off the inevitable, and everything you do that doesn’t keep you alive is even more futile than that.
Human-caused climate change has inexorably accelerated the end of the global ice age such that within a couple hundred years the Earth may be mostly uninhabitable to us even if we completely stop our continued assault on the atmosphere.
If this is the ultimate version of reality, then when you pass there will be nothing for you. If it is not, then whoever made it doesn’t care enough to rescue you.
The only way you can ever be guaranteed to meet your own expectations of yourself is if you lower your expectations to the extreme, in which case you will never feel satisfied about meeting them.
You are, mathematically speaking, almost entirely empty space, just discrete pinpricks, and are no more than an emergent property of quarks, gluons, and electrons behaving according to laws nobody fully understands.
The secrets of Greek fire are lost forever. Even if we were to re-create it, we would not know that we did. The same fate awaits all the creations of humankind.
But that also means they will continually invent new ways to ruin perfectly good pizza crust, over and over and over again, until the universe is nothing but endless black holes.
BBCC
So long as some civilization or other eventually ‘forgets’ to put cheese on their pizza recreation, I’ll be happy.
Define “ruin” in relation to pizza. Because I have never found a pizza I did not enjoy. Charred crust? Still good pizza. Undercooked? Still good pizza. Too much cheese? No such thing. Too much sauce? No such thing. Imbalanced sauce to cheese ratio? It’s still damn good pizza. Weird Greek goat cheese and olive oil pizza? Hey, it’s original way of making pizza before tomato sauce was a thing. Hawaiian pizza? I don’t fall into the category of people who find that disturbing so I really don’t understand the big fuss. Olive, ancove, pineapple, and peppers without meat but with mushrooms in the sauce for some reason? Disturbing yes, but also surprisingly satisfying. The point is, I have honestly no idea as to how one would ruin a pizza.
BBCC
My friend said pizza without cheese was an atrocity. He ate it, but he complained the entire time.
Seriously? While I personally do enjoy cheese on my pizza, I can most definitely see the appeal of pizza without cheese and have definitely enjoyed cheeseless pizza in the pass.
BBCC
I can’t eat cheese (allergic to the mould in it), so for me, pizza is sauce covered crust and a lot of pepperoni. I guess the lack of cheese makes it hotter, because that’s what he picked to complain about. XD We were hanging out at my boyfriend’s house, the three of us and his roommate, and we decided to order pizza for dinner. We were gonna get two, one for me and one for the guys, but I was the one who ended up buying, so I just got the one. My boyfriend and my friend’s roommate both ate it, but my friend labelled it an atrocity.
I feel like I should note now that when I say ‘complained’ I mean the joking kind of complaining that makes me laugh.
vlademir1
@BBCC Sorry to hear about that food allergy. As much as so many of the rest of us in the world enjoy cheese it’s got to be at least as tough as a nut allergy to deal with.
That said, and purely out of personal curiosity, have you tried any of the vegan cheese alternatives? There are several that are quite good (unfortunately none I’ve seen that are commercially produced mind) and even a couple that work as a mozzarella replacement for stuff like pizza.
BBCC
Eh, as long as I don’t eat it, I’m good. So I won’t have a bad reaction if I smell cheese on someone’s breath or if my boyfriend eats it and then kisses me.
I’m not sure about vegan cheese. The part I’m allergic to is the mould, not the dairy. And I tend to distrust things that claim not to be ‘real’ cheese due to lack of dairy because some of them have given me a reaction, while others don’t – for instance, Doritos, cheesies, and crunchits, don’t have mould so I can eat those (though there was a period a couple years ago where they switched to real cheese and I did have a bad reaction, so that sucked. It seems they’ve gone back on that lately, though, whatever they claim, because it no longer bugs me). Regardless, I tend to stay away from anything calling itself cheese, because I don’t want to take the chance and then end up puking my guts out the next day.
287 thoughts on “Covertly”
Ana Chronistic
not enough sleep in the world to make me not want to punch something
Ryek Hvek
“Punch the world, I want to get off.”
Artemis
I don’t remember where the quote is from but it seems apt.
“When life gives you lemons, you don’t make lemon juice, you strangle life for giving you fucking lemons!”
Raibean
not enough lack of sleep in the world to make me eat at arby’s
Sephiroth144
Tonight at arbys: no one cares. Kill. Die. OD. Sleep over. Whatever. We can’t express this enough: we don’t care.
Eat Arbys
Emperor Daniel
When the sun boils the oceans to ash, then you have my permission to make them miss you.
Joe Covenant
“*I* could boil the oceans to ash?”
“This ISN’T helping!”
DarkoNeko
Easy there, tiger
TheAnonymousGuy
I still find it odd that billies so okay with being moved like this
zoelogical
i feel like she was underwhelmed by how little of a queen bee she was in this floor.
and, also, coming up right smack dab against the very personal family drama that is rooming with Sal.
but like also she’s had bigger things to worry about than getting moved
TheAnonymousGuy
“Sir” said it himself. Moving billie was basically a power play to keep hold over ruth and keep any outside influences from helping her, just like back home with that guy and Howard.
zoelogical
yeah
but like this is also the price of getting to continue to date Ruth for Billie. because Billie has no intention of moving meaning she can’t date her girlfriend.
i don’t know what Clint’s contingency plan was for this, but Billie’s a very determined girl and he does not have any authority over her
Tgape
More specifically, according to the likely dormitory rules, once Billie moves, there’s no problem with her dating Ruth. So she can officially move, then move back in with Ruth once and for all. No problem. I don’t see why they’re making a big deal of it. The rule is really there to protect Billie and ensure she has somewhere to go if she needs to get away from Ruth.
Roborat
Yup, that is my read too, if she is moved, there is no need to keep things secret anymore.
Liliet
^^^ this
Temperaryobsessor
Of course he said it himself. With a few words even if Ruth knows objectively that its what the school needs to do to give her permission to date Billie it now feels like their being torn apart.
Pat
It’s not like it’s a punishment. It’s explicitly so that she and Ruth can continue their relationship without breaking any rules. Was she that attached to her room? She barely used it anyway.
Heavensrun
Sal -is- going to have to worry about her new roommate finding out she’s Amazi-girl, tho.
Clif
All problems can be solved with high enough defenstration.
Needfuldoer
She’s being moved, not banned from the floor, so she’ll just have a commute to participate in the plot now.
Kryss LaBryn
Not even much of a commute; now she can openly sleep over with Ruth whenever she likes. She can even bring clothes over for a few night’s stay.
As long as she still does laundry in the other wing, and maintains that as her “official” address, I personally don’t see any reason why she shouldn’t be able to sleep over pretty much all the time–although I guess that “Guests can only stay for four nights” thing means she’d need to crash back at home every fifth night, which isn’t too big a compromise for being able to stop hiding the relationship. 😀
Andy
That sigh physically shows her bubble being burst. I love that.
AutobotDen
Joyce will miss her. But she’ll still be nice to whoever moves into the room next, because that’s just how she is.
Tacos
Quick! let’s post the most nihilistic things we can think of before asking people to eat Arby’s.
Reltzik
Eat at Arby’s.
Eat at Arby’s.
Emperor Daniel
Ryan’s dead.
Eat Arby’s.
Doctor_Who
Can’t top that.
John
donald trump is president of the united states
eat at arby’s
Reltzik
You too can be like Donald Trump.
Eat at Arby’s.
(Works whether or not Trump actually eats at Arby’s.)
Dana
That was below the belt.
John
Well, Tacos did say “the most nihilistic things we can think of”.
Pablo360
Donald Trump could literally pardon himself and everyone involved for the Russia scandal and the GOP-dominated Congress wouldn’t lift a finger.
Eat at Arby’s.
TheStranger
If the President pardons himself for crimes committed, does the Congress have the Constitutional authority to impeach for those crimes after the fact?
That would be the Constitutional crisis to end all crises, I think.
(Eat at Arby’s.)
Reltzik
Impeachment is a bureaucratic procedure and not a criminal prosecution. Just like if you commit a crime your boss can fire you for it and that’s separate from whether you get put on trial by the law. But because Trump’s party controls a majority, they’d let him get away with it, and new precedent would be established.
Eat at Arby’s.
thejeff
“he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”
Pablo360
Granted, the courts could throw that out. But he basically also owns the Supreme Court, so
Deanatay
Except that President Ford pardoned ex-President Nixon, so that isn’t true.
thejeff
Technically, Nixon wasn’t impeached. He resigned when it became apparent the House would impeach him and the Senate would convict. Ford pardoned him to avoid any criminal trials following his resignation.
As I read it though, even if he been impeached Ford could have done the same thing (or Nixon himself could have, before his removal), but that would only have affected criminal proceedings.
I think the point is that the President cannot use the pardon power to prevent removal by impeachment – either of himself or others. He can use it to remove criminal penalties, even in cases that also involved impeachment.
Tarmaniel
Impeachment isn’t a criminal trial, Congress can impeach for literally any reason. All impeachment does is remove you from office, it doesn’t send you to prison.
If Trump were to be impeached, he could theoretically then be prosecuted for any crimes he committed as President, but unless some hard evidence of the Russia collusion turns up there really aren’t any at this point. “Trump obstructed justice” is fairly dumb in the abstract, Trump literally can not commit the crime of obstruction of justice no matter what he does, as he’s the executive and has absolute authority over what the Justice Department investigates. Congress can impeach him for “obstruction of justice,” but that’s totally meaningless in an actual criminal trial because Congress can impeach him because they don’t like his tie color.
hof1991
Nope, the Justice Department doesn’t work for the president. They take an oath of office, but to the consitution, not the president. Firing those who are investigating you is a crime. That Congress is complicit in the crime doesn’t make it not a crime, one that he can go to jail for. Just not while he is still in office. And everyone short of him can go to jail for assisting him.
Schol-R-LEA
Keep in mind, one of the reasons that the Clinton trail stalled, even after he was impeached, was because Larry Flynt offered up to $1 million a pop for dirt on every GOP senator who voted for the impeachment. According to him, by the end of the year he had enough material to send not only them, but every single Senator and Rep, along with Clinton and everyone in his Cabinet, to jail for life.
This was almost certainly an idle boast, but that threat, along with the large number of other folks digging into things on both sides of the aisle, was a significant factor in scaring off not just that proceeding, but the current investigation as well (as a lot of the same people who were in Congress 20 years ago still hold office).
Schol-R-LEA
(Of course, dirt – or at least things that are ‘dirty’ – is something Flynt specialized in, so maybe…)
There were other factors, of course, and that wasn’t the biggest one; the real kicker was that the impeachment vote was so narrow that the GOP leaders weren’t sure they could carry a conviction, which keep in mind would have been tried by the Supreme Court with Congress as the jury. Still, there are plenty of people who know where the bodies are buried.
Getting 500 career criminals to convict one of their own? Not easy. Could they do it with an alleged (but not really in any real way) outsider like Trump? Uh… actually, that’s even less likely. Too many toes to step on for anyone’s liking (Trump is in Construction… think about who the people are who keep bankrolling him after he threw away more than twice as much as he inherited, and are able to keep up the illusion of his nonexistent status as a billionare). Basic survival – not just political, but actual staying alive survival – trumps political partisanship (pardon the pun).
begbert2
Wait wait wait – did you just (strongly) imply that Trump would put out mob hits on any congressmen who dared to participate in a trial against him?
How can something sound both batshit paint-eating insane and strangely plausible at the same time?
PlainMarie
Well, that is depressing. I’d like to think at least half of my senators and reps would not sink to that level to get where they are. Or one of my local reps who I think is aiming at the Senate for someday.
Deanatay
Unfortunately, ‘both batshit paint-eating insane and strangely plausible at the same time’ pretty much describes the entire Trump presidency.
Marsh Maryrose
And if President Trump were impeached and removed from office, President Pence would probably offer him a preemptive pardon. And if Pence were also impeached and removed from office, President Ryan would probably offer him a preemptive pardon too.
And yes, President Paul Ryan is a possibility. Eat at Arby’s.
Schol-R-LEA
Actually, it doesn’t even do that; it just removes the official privilege of immunity from prosecution. Removal from office would have to come after an actual conviction, and then would require a separate vote. I seem to recall that at least some Congresscritters have continued to hold their elected positions after being impeached and convicted.
thejeff
I don’t think that’s a separate vote, though I’m not 100% sure. Near as I can tell, a conviction means removal. There may be a separate vote to bar them from holding (any?) office again. It’s possible that’s what you’re thinking off.
Near as I can tell, no Congresscritters have been impeached as Congresscritters. One Judge, Alcee Hastings, was impeached and subsequently won a seat in the House.
hof1991
If the president is part of a conspiracy (money laundering) then he can not pardon his co-conspirators. Once he is notified that he is under investigation, he is not allowed to pardon those that conspired with him. He is, he is and he can’t. Even Pence, who may be part of the consiracy, may not be able to pardon him.
With Ford and Nixon, Ford stayed out of everything which then allowed him to pardon Nixon.
Schol-R-LEA
IIRC, it wasn’t so much that he stayed out of it, as he wasn’t there for it in the first place. He succeeded Agnew (who resigned over a different scandal) after the events that led to the investigation, (I’m not sure, but he might even have taken office after the investigation began – under his own auspices as Speaker of the House).
Woobie
Where is the pardon limited like that?
thejeff
It’s not, as far as I know. Other than by tradition, which no longer applies.
The President can use his executive authority to halt or interfere with investigations under the Department of Justice, even if they’re aimed at him or his close associates. It was assumed that if this was done inappropriately Congress would assert its authority and impeach him for that abuse of power. Checks and balances. A political remedy for a political problem.
Such norms no longer appear to hold.
Passchendaele
You can only force others to miss the ones you love. And you’ll eventually die too, with nobody caring enough to take over for you.
eat. arby’s.
Kernanator
You will never achieve your dreams because you are forever trapped within a single year centered on you college life.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
Everything you do to keep yourself alive is staving off the inevitable, and everything you do that doesn’t keep you alive is even more futile than that.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
In a few billion years all traces of humanity on the cosmos are likely to have been obliterated and nobody will mourn our passing.
Eat at Arby’s.
kkiten
Is that a nightvale reference? Or just a meme?
Kernanator
It’s a reference to the Nihilist Arby’s Twitter account.
https://twitter.com/nihilist_arbys
Tacos
It’s a reference to Nihilist Arby’s.
https://twitter.com/nihilist_arbys
Pablo360
You will never have everything you want, and if you ever do you will not be satisfied because you will have nothing to strive towards.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
Human-caused climate change has inexorably accelerated the end of the global ice age such that within a couple hundred years the Earth may be mostly uninhabitable to us even if we completely stop our continued assault on the atmosphere.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
If this is the ultimate version of reality, then when you pass there will be nothing for you. If it is not, then whoever made it doesn’t care enough to rescue you.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
The only way you can ever be guaranteed to meet your own expectations of yourself is if you lower your expectations to the extreme, in which case you will never feel satisfied about meeting them.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
You can neither relive your good moments or take back your bad ones.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
You are, mathematically speaking, almost entirely empty space, just discrete pinpricks, and are no more than an emergent property of quarks, gluons, and electrons behaving according to laws nobody fully understands.
Eat at Arby’s.
Pablo360
The secrets of Greek fire are lost forever. Even if we were to re-create it, we would not know that we did. The same fate awaits all the creations of humankind.
Eat at Arby’s.
Delicious Taffy
Okay, but this means future civilisations will be able to invent pizza, over and over again, until the end of all life.
Pablo360
But that also means they will continually invent new ways to ruin perfectly good pizza crust, over and over and over again, until the universe is nothing but endless black holes.
BBCC
So long as some civilization or other eventually ‘forgets’ to put cheese on their pizza recreation, I’ll be happy.
Rukduk
Define “ruin” in relation to pizza. Because I have never found a pizza I did not enjoy. Charred crust? Still good pizza. Undercooked? Still good pizza. Too much cheese? No such thing. Too much sauce? No such thing. Imbalanced sauce to cheese ratio? It’s still damn good pizza. Weird Greek goat cheese and olive oil pizza? Hey, it’s original way of making pizza before tomato sauce was a thing. Hawaiian pizza? I don’t fall into the category of people who find that disturbing so I really don’t understand the big fuss. Olive, ancove, pineapple, and peppers without meat but with mushrooms in the sauce for some reason? Disturbing yes, but also surprisingly satisfying. The point is, I have honestly no idea as to how one would ruin a pizza.
BBCC
My friend said pizza without cheese was an atrocity. He ate it, but he complained the entire time.
Rukduk
Seriously? While I personally do enjoy cheese on my pizza, I can most definitely see the appeal of pizza without cheese and have definitely enjoyed cheeseless pizza in the pass.
BBCC
I can’t eat cheese (allergic to the mould in it), so for me, pizza is sauce covered crust and a lot of pepperoni. I guess the lack of cheese makes it hotter, because that’s what he picked to complain about. XD We were hanging out at my boyfriend’s house, the three of us and his roommate, and we decided to order pizza for dinner. We were gonna get two, one for me and one for the guys, but I was the one who ended up buying, so I just got the one. My boyfriend and my friend’s roommate both ate it, but my friend labelled it an atrocity.
I feel like I should note now that when I say ‘complained’ I mean the joking kind of complaining that makes me laugh.
vlademir1
@BBCC Sorry to hear about that food allergy. As much as so many of the rest of us in the world enjoy cheese it’s got to be at least as tough as a nut allergy to deal with.
That said, and purely out of personal curiosity, have you tried any of the vegan cheese alternatives? There are several that are quite good (unfortunately none I’ve seen that are commercially produced mind) and even a couple that work as a mozzarella replacement for stuff like pizza.
BBCC
Eh, as long as I don’t eat it, I’m good. So I won’t have a bad reaction if I smell cheese on someone’s breath or if my boyfriend eats it and then kisses me.
I’m not sure about vegan cheese. The part I’m allergic to is the mould, not the dairy. And I tend to distrust things that claim not to be ‘real’ cheese due to lack of dairy because some of them have given me a reaction, while others don’t – for instance, Doritos, cheesies, and crunchits, don’t have mould so I can eat those (though there was a period a couple years ago where they switched to real cheese and I did have a bad reaction, so that sucked. It seems they’ve gone back on that lately, though, whatever they claim, because it no longer bugs me). Regardless, I tend to stay away from anything calling itself cheese, because I don’t want to take the chance and then end up puking my guts out the next day.