I really appreciate this interview! I am a first-gen American born to Israeli parents, and while I have many criticisms of Israel, I’ve been so disheartened by certain American, ostensibly pro-peace liberals’ tendency to demonize the country as a whole and categorically condemn all Israelis.

Oh, wow, am I hallucinating or did he just shame you for being a victim of domestic violence (assuming that’s what you meant by “similar situation”)? You probably don’t need to be told this, but you are obviously in no way culpable.

I would argue that “bodily autonomy,” especially as a legal concept, necessarily encompasses the right to an abortion. But even if we agree that it has a fluid definition, a major principle of feminism is that women need access to abortion in order to attain full bodily autonomy. You can define the term however you…

First, you would have to define “unrestricted”, because the majority of feminists do support some sort of post-viability limitations on abortion.

Well, if you truly believe abortion is murder and you want the law to see it as such, then you are free to hold that belief (I’m using “you” as a general term, not you specifically), but what you can’t do is proceed to co-opt the label of feminism, a movement that is specifically operating *against* your beliefs.

Please ignore the asshole who feels the need to manage your relationships for you. You seem like a great ally. Best of luck with this lady!

Yeah, but you can’t really leave out the unique circumstances that surround abortion and would have to be factored into the law. The usual exceptions included in anti-abortion legislation have nothing to do with the woman’s (or doctor’s) intent or mental state, which is what usually differentiates between types of…

From the letter: “Rape on campuses isn’t always because people are rapists.”

Legally speaking, there is no universal standard, because every person reacts differently to alcohol and has a different tolerance level. That’s why a metric for deeming someone “too drunk to consent” is not codified into law, but left to judges to decide on a case-by-case basis. That is far from ideal, but it’s the…

Oh wow. That was gut-wrenching and beautifully written. Thanks for sharing it.

But a woman’s naked body is still being used to draw attention to an issue that doesn’t have much to do with nudity (or the human body at all). However Delevingne personally feels about the cause - and I believe her that she finds it empowering - I don’t think we can look at this without its societal context.

Great, then we’re in agreement. I can’t answer for the original poster, but I imagine that the vast majority of commenters here are perfectly fine with their tax dollars funding abortions. Good to know that we’re on all the same page with that one.

My argument was in response to your original question to another commenter. You asked them whether they were okay with their tax dollars funding abortions, with the clear implication that you were not. I thought I would inform you that tax dollars don’t fund the abortions of the “irresponsible baby killers” you so…

Well, if you disagree that taxpayer money should fund life-saving procedures, then we don’t have much to discuss. And if you believe a dirt-poor rape victim shouldn’t receive federal financial aid to procure an abortion, then our moral codes are clearly diametrically opposed.

Taxpayer money does not fund abortions. Google ‘Hyde amendment.’ Basic stuff.

But her boyfriend probably *will* try something along those lines. I don’t know much about the specifics of this case, but as Vagenius has been telling you, there’s nothing particularly gendered about the accused trying every defense - however batshit (although I wouldn’t consider this defense particularly outlandish)…

The anti-suffrage movements in the U.S. and Britain were also heavily female. I think it’s safe to say that those anti-suffragists were just as sexist as the men they collaborated with.

If so, I’m sorry. I’m not always on my game when it comes to interpreting comments.

What makes you say it’s fearmongering? Do you truly not believe that President Trump would make at least one appointment in four to eight years? Or do you think it wouldn’t make a difference if he did?

I don’t really see the link between this article and the primary elections. The focus on Sarandon is probably because (a) she is, partly due to her political activism, very high-profile and visible lately, probably much more so than Robin Wright; and (b) she and Lawrence (who is also central to the article) both, in…