I think that's important to note, because if we're being honest, there's a SLEW of awful, terrible and illegal things I would do if I was assured there would be no consequences. I have a small number of people who have deeply hurt me who would be deeply hurt (or worse) themselves, I would obtain money through force,…

I wonder why this guy gets ridiculed in the article while the girl who was charged $300+ on Halloween (and her birthday) was to get our sympathy. Granted, she gave us a few more details (that she couldn't pay her rent because of the Uber bill) and got lots of donations to cover the cost. Does it merely come down to…

Srsly. And this includes gawker. Not sure how we got from weak reporting, weak writing, possible fraud in an article to Jackie is a lying liar who was never touched by anyone ever and was definitely not raped.

Erdely had the chance to put that much effort.. But she realized too much effort would make a rape into a non rape.. So she chose being negligent.. And destroy a few lives

This raises a good question-

What's worse: being forced to read Lena Dunham's memoir or being falsely accused of rape?

Look, I dislike Brietbart as much as the next person, but an investigation into an allegation of an extremely serious crime that implicates an apparently innocent person that has the same name, political affiliation and attended the same small liberal arts school at the same time as the person that Dunham named in her…

If it just says "some names" that's not enough to really clarify things and leaves open the possibility that any particular name and person could be completely real and accurate. Putting a note in that particular section that "Barry" is not the mans real name is the safest choice to make sure there is no confusion.

"I will always believe women about what they say about their experiences."

"I will always believe women about what they say about their experiences."

"I don't really damn Rolling Stone here because sometimes you have to follow a hunch. "

You follow hunches by looking for evidence to support them. Sometimes they don't pan out and then you don't write your article. You don't say "hey I think this happened and this one person seems to support my belief so I'll go with it." That's a complete lack of journalistic integrity, everyone involved with the story…

"Imagine how easily Watergate could've turned out false given that it was literally ONE source."

You are the problem.

Very few are blatant lies, that's probably correct. How many are actually just two drunks having sex and one of them not really remembering it is another thing.

"It's still true that very, very few rape accusations are false."

Or because she's 17 and occasionally poses in her underwear?

I would apologize for putting Time on the list of magazines not worth giving a shit about, but I did that years before these poll results. Also, it is true.

World War II's iconic Jeep

While that's a disappointment, it's their prerogative to set the rules for membership if they're a private organization. And I was glad that my women's only gym enjoyed the same prerogative. Yes, the reasons are different, but we have to be okay with private organizations doing things for whatever reasons they please…

It's basically just the middlemen getting pissed off that someone is finally making them unnecessary.