*sigh* Touchy subject for me.

@SkippingTowardsJaded Lost Her Race Card: Just get involved with a boy who enjoys using restraints on you at bedtime. Problem solved.

@sassymoniker: To use a generality, this is why I generally believe girls above all need a positive male rolemodel in their life, and boys need a positive female rolemodel in their life. It doesn't have to be a parent, but it does have to be someone that the person has an intimate (not sexual) relationship with. So…

@SarahMC: Which post are you responding to?

@SarahMC: That isn't a legal issue, it's a societal issue...and one that applies to pretty much every society on the planet. Demonizing men in general isn't a good way to get them to amend their behavior. You'll only create ire and resentment in those who do not actively engage in such behavior.

@FourInchHeels: Women talk about sex and men in far greater detail and candor than men ever talk about women. The availability of smut books for women also proves this. A lot of the writing in those books is simply tragic.

@EMcTrap: Yep, if you're a recovering drug addict, you'll be much more successful at not relapsing if you remove anyone any everyone related to use/dealing from your life. And placing physical distance between you and those people increases your chances of not encountering them on a regular basis.

@braak: Quite correct.

@cocoesq: Oh, and to correct your Nevada/Prostitution theories?

@cocoesq: Yes, but then that goes towards telling people what they can and cannot do with their body based on moral objection from others.

@nerdsausage is in the tank for SATAN: True, inciting others to riot, etc wouldn't be protected. Slandering or libeling (depending upon medium used) wouldn't be protecting. Telling people that Ford cars immediately burst into flames when holy water comes in contact with them likely would be.

@tommythegun: hate speech is basically a very liberal definition for demonizing a person for saying something you don't like. Likely they're usually doing a good job of demonizing themselves without someone labeling them.

@Benevolent_Dictatrix: I don't deny it, I'm simply saying it isn't limited to it. Power regularly comes into my sex life, I intimately know where that power is, and who grants and receives it.

@clonie: Spring indeed.

@cocoesq: Ah, so because she looked as if she were twelve, she shouldn't be in the business, or women shouldn't engage in it at all? Does she feel that she is marginalized and degraded physically and spritually every day, or do you feel that she is simply not educated enough to realize that she is, or are you…

@Political Party Girl: In this day and age, women don't need to do things to undermine themselves. Other powerful women will see them as a threat and undermine them for them.

@mccauller=texaspride.: Yeah, see. I have no issues with a woman in power. I don't call Nancy Pelosi a bitch, nor Condoleeza rice. Just don't ask me what I think about the Clintons in general. ;)

@Benevolent_Dictatrix: Most people consent to things with other issues in mind. I consent to my boss being a jerk occasionally because, I need the paycheck. I consent to paying taxes, because if I don't want the IRS to harass me. I consent to paying for food at a store because I don't want to be arrested.

@Benevolent_Dictatrix: In regards to windofronts in Amsterdam, yes.

@cocoesq: At the age of twelve I do not think you can be legally employed at such a place. More likely they're (the business) is acting outside the law. Which, is pretty f*cking disgusting.