Say what you will about Buttigieg, but the shit about big and small donors is patently unfair. If we’re worried about moneyed interests having an undue influence on a candidate, let’s compare overall amounts of “big donor money”received throughout everyone’s careers, and I’m willing to bet that Pete Buttigieg’s…

It looks like you’re conflating eugenics with some other stuff. Eugenics uses genetics and biology in an attempt to “improve” humanity via affirmative policy controls over human reproduction. One can use genetics and biology to make individual or personal eproductive decisions without it bring eugenics. 

I’m working from the basics of what eugenics attempted to study, namely heredity and how that worked in human. Essentially lookimg at human reproduction in the same way as animal husbandry traits.

I don’t know what definition of ‘eugenics’ you’re working from, but as I understand it, eugenics is as much or more an ethos and set of practices, as it is any distinct area of study—there is necessarily an intent requirement.

The R. Kelly DOC was absolutely necessary—it’s the only reason the authorities got involved in the first place, to say nothing of the fact that it put him sufficiently on blast that he may (hopefully) have a harder time finding victims now. Finding Neverland was made about a dead man who cannot be tried... so who…

Even assuming the reason for canning him is what they say it is (which feels suuuuuuuper dubious)... how about an Anansi Boys show??????? 

They guy sounds like a smug asshole, but I also don’t think this is eugenics. “Making reproductive choices based on genetic information” is not necessarily eugenics. Calling it such is reductive and inaccurate.

Michelle Obama is not more powerful than the person who has been Chancellor of Germany for almost 15 years. She (Obama) should absolutely have made the list, but she doesn’t trump the head of state for the nation with the fourth highest GDP in the world. Angela Merkel deals with literal life-and-death issues all the…

I ask this only because it’s germane to the article: what was the sex of the various, respective parties in that story?

Clearly Gen-X human beings preceded Gawker, and were its primary human instrumentalities. However, Gawker Media (and particularly Gawker and Jez) practically served as a style guide for the phenomenon Flowbee described.

I feel like one of the reasons I read and have read Jez over the years is precisely that this kind of thing tended not to happen with the serious, thoughtful pieces. I mean, there’s always been click bait, but it was of the salacious or bombastic variety—you knew what you were getting. The deeper, more longform pieces…

It’s almost worse that an editor would have chosen the headline. Someone getting so into their own head writing an article that they write a headline that makes sense to them, but that is confusing to some others is something I can totally understand and practically even relate to. But when it’s an editorial decision,…

“He stressed that the anger expressed in their preaching should not be confused with calls to violence. ‘The emotions are justified by what has happened to us and still happens to us as a people,’ said Yasharahla.”

I just read the article twice, and enjoyed it both times. It’s definitely interesting to see such a methodical and wellr-researched history (even if brief) of feminist blogging (and impressive given how hard it can be make a timeline of any sort of movement on the internet.)

I can almost never tell whether, when people in the comments say things like “I’m/we’re not here for Buttigieg,” they’re claiming to not support merely his nomination, or whether they just won’t vote for Buttigieg (or whomever the politician happens to be) at any level.

No one who watched that video and then implies that Buttigieg brought up“the black homophobia” topic, is interested in having a sincere discussion—this mayaas well be a dunk contest to them.

What on Earth is the pedagogical pretense for the assignment supposed to be?

I don’t much want this Supreme Court issuing rulings with respect to women’s reproductive rights, because those rulings are going to fucking suck. Arguably, their not even taking up the case in the first place is a potential blessing, because, despite the fact that by not taking up the challenge the bad guys win by…

These dudes have not been cancelled. They pulled out of the Disney projects because of a $200 million development deal with Netflix.

Right now the narrative is crafted solely from KCPD’s representations, so obviously based on just that, you can reach a reasonable inference that the shooting was probably justified. Now let’s see what the family’s attorney digs up. The facts from KCPD tend to support their narrative, but they’re also bizarrely sparse.