Here's what I would like to say about this issue of a font being for a purpose: Yes, most of the examples presented on this site are heinous and tremendously b

Here's what I would like to say about this issue of a font being for a purpose: Yes, most of the examples presented on this site are heinous and tremendously bad typeface choices. But that has nothing to do with the fact that comic sans was designed to mirror comic book lettering. The designer's intent is not embedded in the typeface, only his actual results. Papyrus falls into the same category. People get bent out of shape about it: "It was meant to look like Egyptian lettering, but now it's on my Greek menu! It makes no sense!" Guess what? It doesn't matter what it was "intended" to convey, it matters what is actually conveyed when people read it. Frutiger was designed for airport signage, but it happens to look great outside of airports too. Granted, it was never meant to be a niche font, but the principle applies: you shouldn't get upset on account of people using something in ways you didn't foresee or intend. All this to say, if you're going to argue that a font is ugly or doesn't belong somewhere, that's fine, but your argument shouldn't be based on what the font was intended for. Sometimes the things we make turn out to be way more useful than we thought. And I'll stick my neck out here and even say that I think Papyrus often looks good on menus :)