Marianne Williamson is a great example of either mistaking information for knowledge or intentionally misrepresenting information as knowledge. She says things that sound almost informed because she knows enough jargon (like her favorite: “medicalization”*) to sound like an expert. It’s like she takes legitimate…

Isn’t it amazing how many Trump supporters attack Democrats who have a working class background and then expect the working class to embrace Trump. It turns out a lot of them are the same kind of middle-class elitist who tells their kid to “get an education so you don’t end up working in McDonald’s” in front of…

Hasn’t a judge ruled that serving prisoners rotting food is not “cruel and unusual” because “the Constitution doesn’t guarantee a right to good tasting food”?

They’re already saying “They can leave any time they want. The facilities aren’t locked.” That’s been a common line for the past week.

Fair enough. She’s got plenty of reasons to decline it. What do you think would be the reason?

I’m excited about the potential Tobin Heath refusal. Imagine the furor when an outspoken Christian turns down the invitation because of her beliefs and her friendships with teammates like Megan Rapinoe.

True Patriots™ know that the founders of the country never disagreed with their leaders and had no room for dissent. True Patriots™ would have been so loyal to their leaders they could have called themselves loyalists!

I want to be surprised that a President overseeing a years-long disaster in Puerto Rico, standing on the brink of war with Iran, losing multiple trade wars, and overseeing concentration camps took time out of his day to angrily dog-whistle a soccer player for not liking him. I really want to be surprised about that,…

The police would make sure we all knew that this was a terrible tragedy that they had no way to prevent and couldn’t possibly have known about. Also here’s how much his family loves him and a teacher/coach who remembers how promising he was as a student/athlete.

My favorite is when someone pulls out lines like “Saying men commit sexual assault is just as bad as saying all black people are criminals or all Muslims are terrorists!” There’s absolutely no analysis of power in their understanding of the world, and the ego is super strong to think the repetition of canned defenses…

Fun (longer than I wanted) story time: I was at a university for 8 years where the police department sent e-mails out to students over every crime committed within a 1-mile radius of campus, and they always used the words in reverse order: “adult male black.” They never said “a white.”

We have the words “child”, “minor”, and “adult.” IIRC, police even use them all the time in reverse order (e.g., “adult male” or “minor female”). It’s not even more words to say “male adult” or “female minor”, and it seems more person-focused.

Those are all good points. I still think we can do better. For one, technical language is usually distancing and dehumanizing by design. It’s both professional and dehumanizing, and it’s professional in part because it’s dehumanizing (just like saying police “neutralized”, rather than “killed”, a a suspect).

How is “male” or “female” any more specific than “man” or “woman”?

I’ve never met anyone who says “Not all men” in any of its myriad variations who is not part of the problem. Anyone who injects that into these conversations is willing to overwrite women’s experiences with their own sense of entitlement that their egos must be taken seriously.

To paraphrase Margaret Atwood for the 1000th time: “Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.”

Good point. I always thought they would probably keep Griswold because it aligns well with the “marriage as the center of all social life” conservative angle, but that may be overridden by the disbelief in an unenumerated right to privacy.

I think they would have to go through Lawrence to get to Obergefell. Why do you think they’d go after Griswold? 

You’re welcome. There is a glaring issue in my comment that says Obergefell wasn’t decided on Equal Protection grounds (it was, but the question is whether that the equal protection argument rests on the precedents of Lawrence that same-sex relationships are part of the right to privacy; that tenuously draws a line…

It’s good to hear that there are reasons for optimism and ways to disagree. I wasn’t trying to say you’re wrong so much as give the perspective that I’ve been discussing with other lawyers. If I learned anything from reading tons of case law for this course, it’s that I’m glad I’m not a lawyer. As a sociologist with…