Yep, it’s almost entirely men. And as with any group the size of the male population, we should look at the environmental causes leading to these shootings rather than just blame them.

The saddest part is that it’s been true for the entire existence of police in the US. We’ve had some periods like this where people have had enough, but the progress is too slow and not enough. Just stop the Driving While Black bullshit now...that by itself will reduce a ton of problems. We can figure out the rest as…

True. Also, witnesses keep lying all the time. We know there was no book recovered. While not having the footage released is bad, this article is neglecting that the chief noted they have numerous witnesses backing up their story.

Sidebar- while it often is truly sexism, a lot of times people who say a woman is shrill are correct- higher voices can get shrill when pushed, where lower voices don’t hit the eardrum as harshly even when flat or scratchy.

Isn’t she talking about their higher range, not just that they have higher voices? I took it to mean they can hit the really high notes but also drop back down into a more middle range.

Yeah, it’s also a bit troublesome that she expected him to adjust to so many things, but more or less forced him into ignoring one of his issues.

There’s absolutely no way they are legit BLM protesters.

Yes, and that has nothing to do with the riots over the Scott shooting. You’re ignoring the facts of this case by substituting a different shooting a thousand miles away.

The problem with this theory is that it now appears the cops acted correctly. The chief specifically mentioned the eyewitnesses who backed up their version of events, and the eyewitness who originally claimed he had a book is now saying a white police officer shot Mr Scott and is being protected (no word on why a…

I’m just glad this, like all other things, can be used for two sides to fight with each other. I mean sure, Richard Sherman’s point was that we should come together, but why bother listening when we can just divvy up sides and yell?

You must not have noticed the false comparison in that meme. We constantly get articles about the potential black athletes had when accused of sexual assault. We don’t get articles about a white murder’s potential.

“First of all, there are racial heirarchies of desirability disadvantage people in the interracial dating market”

Get a pickup. Most models have a middle “seat” in the front that folds down and opens into a storage space.

I’d like to acknowledge my privilege and dismantle it.

Well, except he was exonerated. So you’d have to say “don’t support people accused and acquitted of rape.” Seems less catchy.

Or is he just book smart? People who don’t cover DC are always saying he’s brilliant, and some suggest he was railroaded when he had to resign since other Congresspeople have gotten past affairs. But that’s almost entirely from Democrat/Liberal pundits.

The female to male equivalent is when women sext men.

Know someone who worked with him on a set and said he’s the type that hangs around with the crew and bullshits instead of going back to his trailer, and that he’s friendly to everyone.

And how exactly was he robotic and trained? What would anyone else have said? I know, even without cameras, I’m always really careful about two friends divorcing. The last thing anyone needs is people publicly taking sides.

Obamacare is catchier. There is no chance of the formal name being used when a colloquialism is in play. The press handed it to the conservatives, and most people use that term. I love it (self-employed with a pre-existing condition) but still use Obamacare so people know what I mean.