Lovecraft probably gets a pass for being a product of his time.

I love it when you get something wrong, but it turns out to either be wrong in a really helpful way, or just totally right but at something entirely different to what was intended.

"Heck" has to be one of the ugliest words in the English language. Always say hell instead. Adults saying "heck" is just embarrassing.

It's quite common to hear people do it about non-white races, less common to hear it about white people.

True. But did you really infer that she was talking about ALL young white men?

...So can anyone who knows about the Sun explain why it doesn't bulge at the equator? The abstract mentions a possible reason but it's not entirely clear, and I don't have access to Science...

Even rock stars are allowed to save....

I agree. If I'd written it myself, I'd have included some to make it explicit. But as far as I'm aware (and I presume the original poster's), it is a behaviour unique to young, white men. It probably should have been made clear, but I understand why they didn't bother.

How do you know they don't give their money away? Do you have access to their bank account details? They've made lots of money, sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're keeping it all for their personal use. They don't set their own wages (and if they did and set a low one, it'd just mean a greater share went…

Someone needs to spam a debate and just have every question be a quote from a rage song.

The only issue is the lack of the word "some", which really isn't that outrageous an omission given the context. And something that as a white guy, I had no problem inferring.

There have been a few people misunderstanding, but also plenty of people defending her choice of words. Mariceli could have added the qualifier "some", but its implied presence was pretty obvious, if one wasn't looking for man-hating feminists to start with.

Because it doesn't provide anything useful. Evolutionary psychology is fundamentally untestable, it's all just a bunch of hypotheses. It's a half-science (and it leaves out the important part). The study in this article, while interesting, can't be tested; therefore it's not a science. I reject an entire field based…

Eh, at my uncle's Church of England funeral service, the priest digressed into a little diatribe at atheism. I wasn't too impressed.

"And how dare she saunter into my private hospital quarters with her Dollar Store scent and clackety high heels, and manhandle my breasts while I was trying to spend private time with my brand new baby?"

...And you're proud of that?

Unnatural dyes and sweeteners are no worse than natural ones. The distinction between "natural" and "unnatural" is completely useless and misleading. It doesn't really mean anything, and it certainly doesn't indicate whether or not something is good for you.

...All of the studies ever done show aspartame is safe. You've just been shown that. The correct response is "I'm sorry, I wasn't aware of all the scientific evidence that showed this thing is safe". Not "we'll have to agree to disagree". You were wrong. Not in an opinion-y way, in a factually, totally demonstrable…

Correlation =/= causation. It even says that in like the 3rd paragraph.

Three-parent families seem like they'd be easier on the grounds that raising a child is seeeeeeeeeriously time-intensive (let alone 2, 3 or more) and you could spread the load a bit more.