NYC has a policy that adults aren't allowed in playgrounds unless they are accompanying someone under the age of 14 for the same reason. I get it, but it does seem a bit like overkill. Like cutting through a playground because you are late to work could potentially get you a ticket.

I'm with Richards on this one. It seems unlikely that kids with their families would get abducted at a park, and even more likely that requiring an appointment beforehand would weed out any pedophiles who do get it. (Unless staff are wih them the whole time. Are they?) Stigmatizing people who like to do "kid stuff"…

I don't want women to feel pressured to be nice all the time, however I have never liked the implication that people who are not nice are somehow inherently more "real" or "truthful" than others. Sometimes the not-nice things someone says aren't truths, they're just opinions, the opinions of someone who has a bleak…

So, I talk a lot to people who are in the "new polyamory," or whatever - you know, the Captain Awkward, Dan Savage approved bourgeois American version. They pretty often express the wish that their various combinations be certified as legal somehow, and I see their perspective.

Dr. H. H. Holmes also advertised rooms for rent to single young women.

I'm now going to consider my messiness as one more way I fight for feminism.

I agree. The parts that are gaining the most attention are the least troubling to me. The 7 yo exploring the baby's vagina is probably the most "normal" part of the whole thing. I have no doubt its common behavior. It's all the other stuff that I'd like to hear some experts on child development talk about.

Why are we acting like this is only about her touching her 1 year old sister's vagina when she was 7 and not also about emotionally coercing her sister into sleeping in her bed and then masturbating while she sleeps? And about paying her sister in candy to give her long kisses on the lips? And about paying her sister…

she seems like a fair hybrid of both tbh

"Ariana Grande screams whenever she is thirsty."

So like a parakeet or a newborn?

The use of "female" is so freaking weird. He talked about "female academics" like he is studying the hunting habits of some unusually aggressive marsupials.

Interesting that your shitty grad program never taught you that this belief has been endorsed by the Catholic Church since 1950. Might want to get your money back.

Hang on, hang on. My impression was that that Vatican had acknowledged evolution AGES ago. Catholicism does not equal creationism, and tends to go the 'intelligent design' route. How is this all new?

Well, to be fair... most of the Disney Princes are special needs.

Hahaha dude you are like, just ticking off every item on the list of bad faith sexist argument bullshit. I have no obligation to you. I am not subservient to you. I am not obligated to pretend I don't think you're disgusting. I am not obligated to change my "tone" to one that doesn't make your widdle bottom wip…

"I think Anderson's piece is wonderfully, passionately written and worth a read, but I also think the problem with it lies in not the facts, nor the tone, nor the frustration, nor the wishful thinking, but rather with the resignation that the answer is, always, to change something about us, always us.

They always say relative to protect the identity of the minor victim. It could actually have been her daughter.

So we know who the woman isn't, but do we know who she is? And whether or not she's on board with Jezebel publishing this picture?

You never go full-method.

I get pretty offended when anyone suggests that having a discussion over whether something is humane is worthwhile. It is ALWAYS worthwhile to explore whether something is or is not humane. They are talking about something that might have brought an animal, an emotional creature, distress and whether it could or…