Thank you!

Well, actually... lolololol

It’s funny because those biological differences are accepted as fact, but it’s sexist to discuss any female biological differences.

That’s pretty much it

I’ve seen women do it too. Are you suggesting that no women is ever in a position of power? Are you saying that a position of power is necessary to mansplain? Neither of those statements are true. If they were, then tweets from trolls wouldn’t be adequate examples of mansplaining.

There is something wrong with it - it gives women who do it a free pass because the design of this word and the bias of those using it prevent it from being applied equally to women. Why can’t we just ban together against jerks of all genders instead of coupling it with other gripes that you and others have with men?

No, only men can be morons. Someone tell me again how modern feminism isn’t female supremacism.

I totally agree that what is defined here as “mansplaining” exists and is extremely annoying, but I would not say that it is isolated to men only. On average, I would agree that men are move overconfident than women, and so it would make perfect sense that there are more men mansplaining than women, but a defining…

Yes how insulting to call someone the leader of the free world. You got em so good.

One of my favorite traditions is catching the “Dusk-To-Dawn” at the Northfield drive-in in Northfield, MA. Every Labor Day weekend they run a quadruple feature. It doesn’t quite run until dawn, but it’s a great time nonetheless.

On the LIRR sometimes the train is too long and not every car will platform at shorter stations, so you could very well be on the wrong car. OP said subway cars though - I’ve never seen that scenario on the NYC subway, but also haven’t ridden the entire system.

I can say it made my 6S feel quicker than the day I bought it, which may be a first - at least in my experience - for an iOS update. But as always, YMMV.

You could shorten this article by removing some redundancy. For example:

For those wondering if this applies to simply checking if you were compromised (likely all anyone has done today): I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think it does. Based on pastes of the terms that others have posted throughout the day, I think they have tweaked the verbiage a bit. This is how the first line of the…

Well there’s nothing else to say here. You present your argument, then simply pretend it never happened when I destroy it. There is no convincing you. You just keep pushing forward with your flawed logic and fabricated argument. You’d make a great politician. That isn’t a compliment.

How does the evidence “strongly point” to that? It doesn’t. Common sense dictates that the people leaving their homes in the middle of the worst flooding disaster in the country’s history to take things from closed grocery stores are highly likely to be doing so because they need to, not because they want to.

“I am saying that in a natural disaster, people stealing from closed grocery stores are highly likely to be doing so out of need”

That’s a fine position to have. But in the middle of a natural disaster you can’t task police with determining dire necessity. That would be a court’s job anyway. And suspending the law, purge style, amidst a natural disaster deprives citizens of police when they need them most. So there really is no effective way to…

The post was about someone calling the cops on looters. You attacked people for agreeing that was the right move on the premise that it is morally just to steal in dire circumstances. You can walk it back all you want, but that is and was your position. If you are going to take that stance you’d need to prove that the…