I’m suspicious of anyone that pushes the health at any size movement for profit, which is what she does.

The part of the article about it being “problematic” is just a giant tell that if the studies come out that the problem is with the anatomy making them more susceptible, she’s going to protest because the real problem is not liking the answer.

The anchor point channel in the knee is more narrow in women. 

I think it’s hilarious how desperate the author is to excuse what she admits is a double standard. Might as well have ended every sentence about women harassing men with 💅.

Seriously, that was such an unnecessarily bitchy take to include. The staff were all so sincerely worried about her but trying to keep on trucking regardless while ALSO helping with efforts to find her. Plus they’ve been attacked online for having any association with the case. While my money is on Russell having…

The author also conveniently left out the bit about the spa being harassed due to its affiliation with the so-called “victim”:

I mean look, in all of this Jezebel had to try and find a different bad guy than Russells. Just like Santa just is ... white, Russells just ... checks too many boxes for them to point out that she’s the obvious bad guy here even after the truth comes out. Like unless she’s gone full MAGA-dumbass like Diamond and Foxx…

Plus we just straight-up see a woman scientist leading the group of scientists in the meeting petitioning to not have their weapon used. 

“Obviously, women didn’t get an invitation to the build-a-bomb bonanza of the 1940"

American intelligence agencies don’t exactly have the soundest reputation when it comes to the assassination of people like Tatlock and yet, the questionable circumstances surrounding her death weren’t mentioned in the film.

The small business owner was asked a question by a journalist (you should look up what that is!) and answered it. He wasn’t pushing himself forward, he didn’t say or imply he was most affected by it. In fact, he didn’t use the first person singular at all in the bits you quoted.

There’s probably never been a worse moment in our political and social history to post headlines implying abolition of the family is a good thing.

But it’s not just emphasis, it’s important context. There isn’t a lack of space, so stripping it away could easily be interpreted as bias.

Boy howdy, this trend is getting irritating pretty quickly.

Even worse!

Maybe, just maybe, publishing private and contextless texts to try and publicly shame your ex-partner should be called out as extremely toxic behavior.

It seems as if society has moved to a point where many women think that their feelings are massively important and always valid. Sometimes they share them with the world, expecting empathy and vindication, only to find that the world thinks completely differently.

If he’s speaking the truth that she has commented on minimal weight gain on his part, then to hell with her lard ass.

Because clearly unless your partner only ever says glowing, fawning things about you and is never critical of anything you have a toxic relationship.

Yeah, hold up - she posted a private text that was, best I could tell, fairly gentle about the subject?  And he’s getting bashed?  We have zero context around this.