I thought the author was deliberately using the term "white boy" as commentary on "boy" as used towards black men...? That's why I was baffled about the claims that it represented racism on his, the author's, part.

GET OUT GET OUT GET OUT GET OUT GET OUT.

From the Raw Story article:

I was being sarcastic.

This isn't just a Fox issue, you're right. Gawker ran the exact same footage yesterday — and I heard her name clearly.

How about going after Gawker Media's sponsors? After all, Gawker ran the exact same footage yesterday.

Gawker ran the footage where her name can be heard yesterday.

Love your comment. Nothing wrong with a little bragging, especially to make a great point.

What did men do wrong this time? I feel like we're supposed to be blaming them for something, but I can't quite put my finger on their sin du jour.

+1

Hahahaha. You obviously don't understand women at all if you think there's something offensive about a guy using the phrase "awesome sexual encounters."

Hahahahaha. As far as I'm concerned that's COTD.

"As an aside, I do believe that you are the only commenter here that will say that you think she might have great self-esteem."

Ok, I'll try to explain.

Ugh. What sanctimonious, patronizing bullshit.

Sure. But racism and xenophobia are not homogenous. The selected quote did not give a good feel for Baum's version of it.

I wasn't defending Baum — hence, "for what it's worth." I posted this because the quote selected doesn't give one a good feel of the view he's propounding in the editorial.

Less offensive? I don't think in those terms.

Here's the whole Baum editorial from which Ruth Hopkins very selectively quoted. For what it's worth.