catwomyn
catwomyn
catwomyn

The idea of "class coffee" pisses me off. School administrators know that many parents work during the day, yet they set these things up anyway, and now you get to feel like a shitty person for not being able to invest in your kid's education or whatever. And notice that it's only supposed to be with the mothers; it's

I thought when she was asking for the names of the other non-attendees she was going to contact those parents and suggest something like Class Cocktails - every other Wednesday at 11pm.

How many dads were at class coffee?

All I hear is "I'm OK with my employer paying me less because I have a uterus." I've been "harping" on this for three days now - refusing to cover birth control or certain forms of birth control is a SCOTUS-sanctioned PAY CUT for women, and ONLY women. How the fuck is no one seeing how fucking discriminatory this is?

Not even just health. Ability to control fertility is so crucially tied to women's ability to control their economic, social, and creative lives.

You absolutely can have caffeine while pregnant and then while nursing. Not three pots of coffee a day, mind, but a cup or two in the morning and maybe your afternoon latte? Not a big deal at all.

Tax benefits through joint income tax returns and family partnership

Because marriage is a legal contract which binds two people in various ways including property and finances. The question should be why do churches and religious people get to have a say in a legal contract?

Because there are legal ramifications to doing so? Seriously, it doesn't take a lot of thought to answer that question, and I'm always amazed that someone brings it up every damned time.

These arguments are not those of serious people.

I have had mosquitos land on me, take a sniff, and fly away. I get maybe one bite a year. I'm one of those dry earwax people; the article doesn't mention those genes, but I can't help but wonder if they are connected because the dry earwax people and the wet earwax people definitely smell different.

No it isn't. That definition is debated even among the most hardcore scholars of the soft sciences. Try not to wax intellectual. That's called the "appeal to authority" fallacy, btw.

Fair point, racial prejudice covers a great deal of the kinds of non-power-involving racism we see in the world; but since many, many, many people (and some pretty well-respected dictionaries) use racism in a non-power-involving way (and since the history of the term is multivalent with regards to power), it seems

Reasoned arguments don't belong here.

I disagree that practicing racism necessarily requires power. One can be racist against one's own or others, whether or not one has any power to wield. I disagree that this girl's behavior equated to racist behavior. Indeed, those who think it does evidently aren't quite clear on what racism is or means ... and

The term "racism" seems to be used in different ways by different people. Obviously modern liberals and progressives take the term to imply a power structure, but lots of definitions of racism don't implicitly involve a power dynamic. Here are some other ways racism is defined: "the belief that some races to be

Are you really surprised that a Catholic University would think this way?

There is SUCH a difference between the various dioceses and Catholic colleges and a company like HOBBY LOBBY. I personally do not believe anyone should be exempt from the BC mandate but I get it with those explicitly religious organizations. For Hobby Lobby to get itself lumped in here is, as we all know, a truly

Best way to get more men into nursing: get rid of the stigma of male nurse. It has nothing to do with if it's "manly enough" a job. In fact I feel a bit revolted at the idea I wouldn't be a nurse because it's not "manly enough."

How long until we're told how we can and can't spend our paychecks? And yes, it is basically the same goddamned thing.