See, I long held strong about not messing with my curly hair through the end of college. Now I straighten my hair every time I shower.

But if we take that neurological evidence that shows that women's brains are more well-developed than men's in the areas that deal with emotions and interpersonal relationships*, what stops us from suggesting that brains are constantly forming in childhood, when parents are messaging to kids the actions that earn them…

Oh no! I meant only that well-applied makeup is virtually invisible, and the effect of that makeup (like the effect of good ol' fashioned good genes) is usually appealing.

Should we be trying to justify that stereotypically feminine traits are worthwhile, or just debunking stereotypes altogether? Spending time explaining "why certain [feminine] traits are in no way weaker" seems to me to be an activity as fundamentally flawed as attacking stereotypes of bad Asian drivers by explaining…

I think you're absolutely right to be cynical about what the execution would look like. Based on my own skepticism that the event itself will ever take place, I was defending the event in theory.

I'm interested in what this would entail for all gendered items and actions, following your reasoning. If girls like pink, it must be because they have a natural predisposition? (It must be their childlike fascination with vulvas!) If boys like blue, it must be because they are naturally disposed toward the color? (It…

The truth of this can be seen in the fact that I'm salivating while I read the blue list, and not the pink.

You're spot-on with that simultaneous pride in one's Native heritage and disregard for problems in the Native community that is true for a lot of Oklahomans. The NM comparison seems to be a very apt one.

If there were any trend like this, I'd assume it was just a manifestation of the already acknowledged trend that women are taught to be more comfortable acknowledging and discussing emotions. To continue the tiresome dressing room scenario: when she says, "But what do you really think?", she's not just digging into…

Someone just commented an important correction, although they seem to have withdrawn the comment: the dreamcatcher is part of my school's flag, but the state flag includes the Osage shield and seven feathers, along with an olive branch.

Is there really any belief in the scientific community that biological predispositions could be at fault for distinctions like men accepting surface solutions moreso than women? Even if we accept this trend as some kind of provable reality, the idea that this kind of behavior could be based in biological differences…

I think that's very well-said.

This is such a phenomenal way to take all the air out of the Dove "love yourself!" campaigns. Demeaning us with one hand and flattering us with another? They're like a Reddit-schooled pickup artist.

But isn't failing to question the merit or causes of widely observed trends what makes those trends inflexible? If we believe that behaviors like the ones in this article are at all social, as opposed to biological, changing them requires that we view them as non-absolute.

I think many, many people don't have an awareness of that genocidal history. How many kids grow up learning the Thanksgiving story and cheering for the Redskins? How many Gawker readers commented on the first "Mail of Tears" (prior to the name change) talking about how they previously hadn't even known what the Trail…

Great points. I, too, cringe when I think of the dreamcatcher keychains and drum circle barbecues that could be spawned by an event like this.

It seems to me that having a drum circle would be more putting a false positive spin on Native American history—"...and that's why we call ourselves a 'melting pot,' kids! Dreamcatcher keychains for sale by the door!"—than acknowledging realities like the Trail of Tears' huge and lasting influence on Native American…

See, I think I'm just a degree or two removed from what you describe, but I still wouldn't call that really not giving a shit—it's more just low-maintenence. The idea of truly not investing in one's appearance at all seems to me to be a more extreme (but potentially powerful?) way of life.

This needs to be promoted to higher up in the comments to this post.

True, you have to build a lot of infrastructure, but the Olympics brings in millions of dollars and tons of jobs, not to mention huge publicity for your city. (The '96 Games in Atlanta, for example, are credited with being a huge piece of the revitalization of that city that's been going on since then.)