Oh those big evil mens taking advantage of the poor widdle womyn.

I don't know...assuming women can be held responsible for their actions and decisions seems vaguely patriarchal.

So women athletes, knowing very well that they will have to compete on the same course as men, want to train on a course modified for women?

This article is heavily plagiarized from the Chicago Maroon article. No effort was made to get in contact with the original writer as well.

The only surprising thing about this article is the implication that University of Chicago students are having sexual relations of any type.

No it's that miracle melon thing she keeps advertising on TV.

Kendall Jenner is of the Jenner-Kardashian clan and is 18. And stunning.

Yeah, I agree. However I think I've heard that if you have an abusive partner, you should always dump them in public, so they'd be less likely to fly off the handle and you would be somewhat safer.

Yes, just like the fact that rape exists means there's no such thing as consensual sex.

It was back last week, in the UK at least. Episode 2 was yesterday. I tried to watch it this morning but I couldn't get BBC iPlayer to work >:( I was grumpy all morning without my TG fix.

Fifth Gear, Top Gear's rival, has (had?) a female presenter; I think there were 3 presenters. She also really seemed to know her stuff and had good chemistry with the cast. (That said, I have never watched much Fifth Gear, nor do I know much about cars.)

I will be inconsolable if anything (or anyone) disrupts the Jeremy/James/Richard dynamic.

No. A "moral imperative" means "believe her at all costs, no matter the circumstances," which is "he is convicted without due process." Because if the default is "she is telling the truth, full stop," why have a trial?

Cow tows? Is that like a moo point? ;)

So, in other words, #solidarityisforwhitewomen?

Yeah, this girl shouldn't have published the book if her abuser is still an "alleged" abuser.

While it would've been comforting for Lulu to make a moral stand, it is in the end a business, and legally a person is innocent until proven guilty. Legally, the stepfather could potentially sue for libel. It seems like it would be a stretch to suggest that Kwissa (and apparently her family at large) are making it up…

When they're saying the complaint has merit, they're not saying they think he's innocent. They're saying that he satisfied the basic requirements for showing there could be a problem with the content—e.g. he had purchased the book, and even if his name was changed, he might be identifiable if you know the author or…

Seriously, is it that fucking hard to write a nuanced story about how unfortunate this whole thing is without resorting to rote hyperbole? There are plenty of boring, unsensationalized reasons to take down her content which has been clearly explained by the publishers themselves — NO, SCRATCH THAT, THEY CLEARLY LOVE…

The key word here is 'alleged.' Do I think this guy is most likely an abusive scumbag? Probably, sure. But do I think that means Lulu is obligated to keep a book about it up when under the threat of legal action? Not at all. As they pointed out to Kwissa, she has every right to publish the book elsewhere; they just…