Yes

Hey, asshole. If the woman on the other side of the coin doesn't want to get an abortion, she doesn't have to. If she fights against all womens rights to get abortions she's a traitor to women and needs to stay the fuck out of their uteruses...uteri... whatever. You seem to be against rational thought and logic.

WOOOSH. That's the comic going right over your non-comprehending head.

Wait, so you don't identify as a member of a completely logical social justice movement because of the actions of a minority of members of that movement? Feminists dodged a bullet not adding someone with your reasoning skills to their ranks.

ssssssssss.

You don't identify as feminist because of magical straw feminists that exist in your brain that is entirely ignorant of actual feminism? Okay captain goofy. Signed, a dude feminist.

Oh my god. Put him in everything. But most of all, let him play both Fat Charlie and Spider in a miniseries of Anansi Boys.

Feminist-ally is often used to describe just what you're saying, and is a totally respectable thing to say if you feel uncomfortable claiming feminism.

I'm new to the PC game. Can someone tell me how mine would stack up with the rest factored in?

there are women who don't want to be called feminists because they see the title as co-opted by people primarily concerned with the equality of white heterosexual women. But i get your gist.

someone get hipoldgay to a burn unit.

I don't trust non-feminists unless they're claiming a different title because they feel feminism is largely representative of heterosexual white women. I still stick with feminist, or intersectional feminist if the conversation warrants specifying.

This is lesson 1 of what we don't want from our fellow male feminists. Mistaking the lovable buffoon married to the hot wife as somehow being systemic oppression.

Add: Don't take it personally.

the penis can go in many holes in a non heteronormative sense.

right. It doesn't change the fact the sentence is thought policing. The line substitues fantasizing for planning. when planning should be the illegal thing. People can fantasize about weird shit and protect themselves in tandem. Prioritization is not required.

His falls under planning. And his defense is bull. Doesn't change that the line is poorly worded.

He was doing both, but one isn't important, the other is. The sentence is scary because it doesn't say "which is more important, the right to plan a murder or the right to protect yourself from one?" The sentence omits the planning and substitues fantasizing, which is where it goes awry. The fantasy shouldn't play…

I agree its a scary sentence because there's no reason to have to prioritize one of those rights over the other since the person in this case was obviously not just fantasizing about it.

I'm interested in how people got past 12 here without at least hearing scat porn joked about.