Yes. I feel he's being intellectually dishonest about why he has made those choices.

He's painting a choice based on preference and conditioning as a careful, ethical decision. Either say you're not going to be vegetarian anymore and leave it at that, or invest some effort in actually seeing how food is produced so your assumptions about what you could kill have some support.

The fluff is that he has any idea whatsoever about what he could kill, or that it is in any way linked to his food choices. I don't mind when people make decisions based on personal preference and cultural conditioning, but I don't like it much when they dress them up in ethics to make the choice look like a moral one.

I don't think his statement needs to be read that way for the point to stand. From what I know of him, Chris Martin probably doesn't have a very good idea what his conscience would allow him to kill. Perhaps he could kill an elephant without it causing him distress. Presumably he could kill a human in certain…

But that's so circumstance-dependent. If you handed me an assault rifle (not that I know how to use one, but theoretically speaking), pointed another at my head, and said "It's you or the baby cow," hell yeah I could kill the baby cow. On the other hand if you handed me a box cutter and said "Kill the baby cow or…

I...don't think they will.

The idea of only eating meat that you kill IMHO actually makes a lot of sense. However, eating based on hypothetical killing animals? Not so much. I don't eat meat because I wouldn't have the heart to kill anything .. also, I'd probably suck at it if I tried.

You haven't seen much of the "sex only in marriage" Christian religious teachings, then. A huge amount of them focus on the backwards idea that a woman's viriginity has some special value and must be given as something special to her husband. You see the same stuff with the whole "loose" thing— though I have no idea…

I think they're implying that someone else wrote the article for her. That is, she couldn't possibly have written it herself because...[fill in the blank]

She got a ton of publicity, it fucked with her life in a big way, and she's using it to make money and spread her views. She made lemonade. Why are people so bothered by that?

LOLLLLL. That is the most hilarious explanation of feminism I have ever seen. If you can't identify at least 20 glaring problems with what you've said, I can't help you.

To degrade means to lower in value. When you go around arbitrarily deciding that other people are degraded- lowered in value- based on their sexual expression or say that someone's self-worth is not intact because of a type of consensual sex they're having, not only are you imposing your own sexual mores on others,…

Oh jesus, fuck right off. You know absolutely zero about me. The only assholes I see here are the people like you claiming to be "feminists" while doing nothing but judging other women for their sexual preferences and telling them they need therapy. Newsflash: You don't get to be the final arbiter of someone's…

Sadly, it doesn't surprise me that many sex workers "buy in" to these destructive narratives. When I identified as trans at a GLBT center, I received so much hostility from the gay men there that one of the counselors had to stage an intervention. One guy got right in my face and said "You're the reason my dad hates…

Yep.

Is this typically your go-to defense mechanism, attempts at seeming detached by using the "pft, yeah right" tactic, or do you just reserve that type of transparent childishness for the internet?

Obviously coercion happens in the pornography industry. What is your solution, might I ask? Get rid of porn all together? Clearly we both know that's not going to happen.

I don't have much time to formulate a thoughtful response, but I am very glad to see Knox speaking out on Jez. I admittedly didn't follow much of her story, but happened upon the recent Rolling Stone interview and found her...well, very likable. Smart, thoughtful, honest. The biggest issue, as addressed somewhat, when…

This is infinitely less insane than what I had imagined based on skimming the title, which is that it was a gambling show where people betted with their babies instead of their money. I guess that's what I get for misreading "Bet On Your Baby" as "Bet Your Baby".

Awesome sauce! I thought this show was cancelled. It's the best, I especially love when the babies aren't having any of it, and proceed to do the opposite of everything their parents say :-).