I'm pretty sure what's got your pants in a bunch is that Lindy DOESN'T have issues with her fatness. But way to sound like a judgemental ass. (Also, you know what Christie's eating habits are....how exactly? Because that's just fucking creepy.)

No, actually, I choose to focus on the giant glaring problems that contribute to rape and victim-blaming rather than validate another dude's "but what about us" whining. Your mindset is *exactly* part of the problem.

How about a little perspective is what I'm saying. I'm so fucking tired of dudes like you reading any story about rape—and the huge numbers of rapes that go unreported, and the huge sexist culture that gives rape a big old pass—and then saying "but, but, but... what about the false claims"? You know what? Until we get…

False rape claims are, according to the Justice Department, between 2 and 8 percent of rape claims—exactly on par with false claims of other crimes. However, 54 percent of sexual assaults are NEVER reported at all. If you think that that those two things are in any way equivalent, I feel sorry for you. One…

Hey, guess what? False reports are, according to the Justice Department, between 2 and 8 percent of rape claims—completely on par with false reports of other crimes. 54 percent of sexual assaults, however, are NEVER reported. The idea that "false reports" are a big problem is just a straigh-up myth.

One of the characters, the veterinarian Dr. Gina, is a single mom who adopted a baby from Guatemala.

My comment isn't directed at mods. It's directed at Jezebel (and Gawker) management, who clearly should get by now that volunteer mods are not enough, and that the influx of trolls, especially after the Reddit flap, is really dragging down the experience of Jezebel in particular. Also, just fyi, mods might want to…

Jesus Christ, I miss the days when trolls would be BANNED. God damn, Jezebel, your comments are becoming a second-rate reddit-fest of hate and misogyny these days. Can you not do a single damn thing to rein it in? Because it's really starting to turn your site into a cesspool.

I bet you're the white guy who goes onto posts about racism and says "but blacks can be racist too!" IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT YOU, DUDE.

Hey, guess what? The participants in this study were self-selected—totally skewing the research. (Women volunteering for the study are more likely to not be ones with self-esteem in the basement, histories of abuse, etc.) Also, it was financed by an adult-film industry group. I am not anti-porn, but holding this study…

I'm no fan of Dworkin, Brownmiller (or their latter-day incarnation in Gail Dines)...but I feel like this article, the headline and the juxtaposition of those two photos is one giant troll for a nasty straw man argument. As others are pointing out, the self-selecting nature of the survey makes its results somewhat…

No, actually it's not. You're offering bullshit free market solutions (let the ladies have their separate but equal companies, hey!) to sexism—which is social and institutional discrimination.

So the civil rights movement shouldn't have ever pushed for white businesses to hire Blacks, or for white-only lunch counters to serve Blacks, but for Blacks to start their own businesses and lunch-counters? Your view is a recipe for protecting sexism, not challenging it.

Because of lack of capital investment from an industry that routinely ignores/shits on women-oriented businesses and games? Because THEY aren't the problem, the sexists are? Because THEY shouldn't be forced to change, the sexists should? I know you might think your question is benign, but man, if that's really your…

Somebody's been reading the Oatmeal.

We've got those in Chicago too...and torture cops...

We've got rape cops in Chicago as well. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-2-chicago-cops-charged-with-sex-assault-20110511,0,6865638.story

Annalee, one of the most liberating things I've ever listened to is China Mieville's talk "Guilty Pleasures: Art and Politics," in which he argues that we should just give up the guilt—that it's just not helpful. I highly recommend it, even if I still can't quite manage to give up the guilt totally.

Who, on earth, is trying to "suppress" that it may have been intended as a joke? You arrogantly deride people for "willfully misinterpreting" you, and yet in your first post you willfully misinterpreted people being outraged as somehow not being able to recognize that it was intended as a joke (based on your imaginary…

Except first you said people were assuming it was serious and then you made the claim that people were trying to "suppress" it. That's not what people are saying. And throwing around a word like "suppression" does actually make it seem like you think it doesn't matter—and that you're more concerned with protecting the…