Do you think trying to be cultural relativists will bring a swifter end to female cutting/circumcision?

That is culture for you.

Both are bad, but FGM tends to be worse. It would be better to compare the removal or alteration of the clitoral hood, rather than FGM in general.

Those future old people will likely be more liberal than the old people now. That's the thing. People in the U.S. are becoming more and more progressive. Even if the right surrenders on all social issues, more and more people will become skeptical of the capitalistic trickle-down approach that protects the rich.

As far as I've seen, republicans and conservatives aren't that good at appealing to young people, even when they're trying to.

I hope it's satire, because it's mind boggling how it could not.

I just posted a comment that was opposite of that...so no.

I think it's more important to be conscious and considerate of the gender identities of others than it is to use words that are convenient and habitual. I was just saddened that one of the first comments about these gender non-conforming boys called them girls. What if this was an article about young gender…

Young boys don't really have much at all safe places and outlets for this stuff. It doesn't have to be any worse than dressing up as a super hero or monster on Halloween (and having a costume contest), especially since boys generally aren't exposed to the same and same amount of appearance pressures as girls.

Don't you think it can be disrespectful to call someone a gendered word that does not sync to their gender identity?

How do you know that they think they need makeup to feel feminine (if that is even their specific intended goal)?

What do you think a camp for nonconforming girls would be like?

So...are you calling these boys girls? Isn't the point of the camp that they can be the boys they want to be?

Kind of? I think you're right about boys doing "feminine" stuff, but girls and women hardly always get a pass for liking and doing "masculine" stuff. In fact, most of the time they probably get shit for it. It may be less bad in the western world, but it's still not much better.

There's actually a fair number of things (in at least some versions of the Bible) where Jesus is decidedly not a nice guy.

I criticize the fuck out of religion, but don't insult people for being religious.

I don't like this at all.

There is no dichotomy here. They can bring great news coverage without treating the murderer like a glamorous rock star on the cover.

I have not seen anyone say that Rolling Stone should be barred from putting him on the cover - only that they shouldn't choose to.

That was a good decision.