May I please have your permission to use selected bits of your post to create an Urban Dictionary definition for "meth-gyver"?

Exactly.

What's this only "a bit" of butter nonsense?

I'm pretty sure one male in an enclosed space with 100 females isn't going to be violating anybody's consent if he knows what's good for him.

I... wait, what? I wasn't even talking to you. I was talking about Sqarr's post from way way back near the start of the discussion.

Okay if I use this in my rhetoric of hate speech class in the future?

I smell SITCOM!

Invasion my ass - watch the video closely. It's stalking the kid. These are not defensive actions in the slightest. The dog was hunting.

I've known cats who are pretty protective of people they've closely bonded with, particularly children. Including being quick to attack those they think are hurting their people.

As for the dog, it was clearly stalking/hunting the kid - the attack was genuinely out of nowhere. The dog had no discipline and clearly saw the child as prey (just look at the way it shakes the poor kid when it gets ahold of him - that's what dogs do to snap their prey's neck!).

My problem is not with your general stance, my problem is with your lack of nuance and your tendency to conflate different institutions under simplistic slogans.

I find it beyond aggravating that this Friedman "small and homogeneous" argument is always used as the excuse for explaining Scandinavian social stability. As with anything involving large numbers of people, the reality is complex (Scandinavian countries are becoming increasingly less homogeneous for awhile now due to…

I don't need to walk down to one, I've already been to quite a few.

I don't buy it - slogans oversimplify things. Read Antonio Gramsci for a more nuanced take on government and power.

Classic libertarian oversimplification.

Men are also at significantly higher risk than women of having HIV in the US. Should we ban all male blood donations just to be safe?

At my gut level, I agree with what you're saying. My gut particularly appreciated your "it's not feminism and won't promote any real dialogue" point.

That's just the thing, though - Americans on average tend to react VERY negatively to any perceived attempt to infringe on their right to free speech (even though most of them don't stop to realize even American "free speech" has all kinds of built in restrictions - as with so many things, the perception matters more…

That's certainly not a bad idea. I've mostly managed to cut it down by explicitly mentioning during review sessions that they need to remember the actual, discipline-appropriate term, but it would probably be more effective to do it that way as well!