Apparently not! This article is really bothering me.
Apparently not! This article is really bothering me.
Must we really assume that all women who drink do so because of some kind of male peer pressure? Can't we allow women enough agency to imagine that they might actually enjoy drinking?
Meeting in the middle—where women aren't scrutinized based on their ability to live up to ridiculous, virginal, puritanical "ladylike" standards, but aren't held to dangerous and stupid macho standards, either—is apparently not an option.
~reads headline~
That could be a generational thing. He's a full 15 years younger than W and Clinton. The expectations of hands-on parenting by dads were different.
Me thinks he's one who actually had a hand in raising his kids instead of being a distant father type man. That's the impression I get from most politician photo ops their face always seems to say "A baby? What the hell do I do with this?"
"President ignores nations woes, spends time with mysterious white female."
I don't think I've ever seen a politician be better with children. He's not guarded with them, and so they're comfortable with him. It seems unfakeable to me.
I'm German, football is a goddamn religion here and if I'd had a Euro for every time I was told that I only enjoy the sport because of the men in short pants or that my ovaries prevent me from understanding the first thing about the game, I could've afforded the ticket to Brazil.
So you're geeked as hell about the World Cup, cranking out article after article about it, despite it costing billions of dollars that could have been better spent improving life for ordinary Brazilians.
As an American who plays and watches the game, that's hogwash. Goalie = Keeper. They are synonyms, just like field = pitch, team = club, boots = cleats, etc. No need to be pedantic about terminology.
Why didn't you say no to clicking on this post? #confused
Am I the only one who thinks that Kim K looks like she could be Queen of Spain/is crazy beautiful in that picture?
is there anything I like that won't give me cancer/kill me? GAWD.
Also, if you weren't already married, you could've married him to protect yourself.
A smaller secondary point to the one you raised: I also found this really reductive and insulting to men who are married, have children and are not abusive monsters. The implication that the only reason they're caring and loving spouses and fathers is because of a government contract is pretty gross.
It's bad to take data that correlates and then just make up whatever causality floats your boat. Science doesn't work that way.
It isn't. But the reason those women aren't victims of violence has a lot more to do with socio economic status than marital status specifically.