I agree. Whilst it's kind of funny to see people caught lying (unless you're them, in which case it's super embarrassing), it'd be interesting to know how people in other contexts and other demographics react to similar questions.

Why would you do this on a flight where drinks are, presumably, free? I've never flown with Virgin, but on all the other non-budget airlines I've flown with, this was the case. My favourite is Air France because they break out the fizz even in Economy.

I loved this video. (As usual!) I love ghost stories and I have considered going on a "ghost tour," but I don't remotely believe in ghosts. Most accounts can be explained by psychological phenomena and are strongly affected by confirmation bias. And surely, even if you limit potential ghosts to humans who met violent…

For use in the further suggestion I suggested, she'd be perfect. Especially in the UK where most people have strong feelings about her one way or the other. I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting hanging pictures of specific powerful women in places where to do so wouldn't be appropriate.

It might be an interesting area for further study to see if whether women like/admire the powerful woman in question has any influence on this effect. But yeah, that's not what this study was about.

I agree - it's not as if they were particularly interesting or engaging questions. They have a point about him filling an entire series, but that's pretty much standard for the "reality" genre.

Thanks! I had a rummage about and couldn't find anything, but I wasn't sure if that was because I was searching in English from China and don't have academic access to journals. This is daisy-chaining of completely unsubstantiated reports.

The study is not even linked in any of the articles linked in the articles linked in this article. Has anyone read/seen this article? It's fine to use this as a jumping off point for a discussion on bras, but if we can't see the details of the study, we can't assess its validity.

Add to this that none of the linked articles link to a proper scientific account of the study, so you can't tell exactly what they found, exactly how or a discussion of any implications.

Eva Mendes is right. Cemeteries are interesting, serene places. Reading headstones is endlessly fascinating and I don't think we should be squeamish about it.

Whatever else you may think of them, according to this article (sixth paragraph from bottom), European-based Femen activists, particularly their leaders, take some pretty serious risks themselves.

As far as I'm aware (through reading Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre and studying the Johns Hopkins Coursera course in vaccine trials - so relatively informed but by no means a professional in this area) women are only excluded if they are or become pregnant. I'm not sure if this is the case for "first-in-man" trials.

Yes x 1 million. (If you like entry-level sci fi and childish jokes. Which I do.)

As a Newcastle resident: what a wuss.

Is there a peer reviewed journal article for this study? I say this not to discredit it but because, if it does stand up to scrutiny, I would love to be able to bust out this study in debate. Unfortunately, if I use badly formatted PowerPoint slides with only alusions to data, it simply won't hold up.

Definitely. Also: Brass and Boys from the Black Stuff.

Disliking union leaders, as a whole or individually, does not mean respecting Thatcher. My enemies' enemy is, in this case, almost certainly not my friend.

Which 1.6%? I'm going ears.

Sexism exists. In a society that regards white men as standard, one terrible white male Prime Minister is one individual terrible Prime Minister. One (arguably) terrible female Prime Minister is considered representative. It's not right and female politicians shouldn't be held any more accountable than male…

I am willing to recognise that that she got where she did by being entirely ruthless to anyone less powerful than herself. I am not appreciative of it.