Rowling came from the Stan Lee school of alliterative nomenclature.

I need to find some twins to hang out with so I can call one the Boring McWorse Twin

He didn't cheat with the twin because the twin's personality was better. Every guy I've ever talked to about this sort of thing says that the desire to have sex with other women is all about variety/newness. One guy I dated (briefly, for obvious reasons) once told me that if he saw my identical twin standing across…

It's nice that they pixelated his arms too.

It is possible one twin was fatter. Or had a better haircut. Or was better at sex. They're not clones.

Maybe this is a sinister trick played by the twin, and the husband thought he was with his wife? I'm going to believe this because I'm a big fan of sinister tricks.

Yeah, that entire book made me so angry. Jessica does nothing but be a psychopath and Elizabeth LETS her! AND THEN THEY MAKE UP BECAUSE THEY'RE SISTER BUT JESSICA IS STILL A PSYCHOPATH. SHE WILL ALWAYS BE A PSYCHOPATH.

My goal in life is to be able to think of, and do, the exact right thing at the exact right time. This lady will look back on this event and think, "Nope, there is nothing I wish I had thought of. I handled that perfectly."

That sounds almost like an Archer joke. "Yes, I was cheating with your sister - your twin sister, which means I obviously still find you very attractive."

Hey New Zealand terrible "Christians" are America's turf you best back-off Hobbit-land.

I think you're confusing the demonstrable fact that the dominant form of masculinity is toxic with the idea that masculinity itself is toxic. There are individuals who argue masculinity, that the very concept of manhood itself, is toxic. I am not one such individual. I know too many trans men actively exploring…

Nope. Reread, because that is the very opposite of the a priori assumption here. People are people. Men are men because of reinforced and reinforcing oppressive frameworks. Men, as an oppressor class, exist because of these frameworks. Human males are not inherently brutal and toxic, so you guys needs to change what…

I think the basic point of the article was that men are *not* inherently brutal and toxic. Society teaches them to be this way. If it really was inherent, changing their socialization as the article advocates wouldn't make it go away.

It isn't, unless you've made it so. Toxic masculinity is not the only potential masculinity. But you need to go out and find out what that is. Talk to trans men, they are definitely at the forefront of this search.

Agreed. Expecting women to sacrifice time and energy we very much need for ourselves to fix men's problems for them is toxic masculinity. I'm happy to be supportive and be an ally to men who recognize patriarchy as harmful to them and are working to change it, but they're going to have *gasp!* actually do the work…

In my experience, feminists are frequently very aware of the impact of toxic masculinity on men and are, in fact, the only people who actually actively advocate to free men from rigid gender constructs. If nothing else, most feminists recognize that true equality is impossible so long as affiliation with things…

I don't think one precludes the other. Just because an abuser was a victim doesn't mean they're not responsible for their actions, and it certainly doesn't take away your right to your feelings. Also, you have no obligation to forgive anyone until you're truly ready.

Damn. I agreed with this so much but still have reservations. I understand that abusers were likely once victims but I can't help but still feel very angry and betrayed by them. It's just one of the core tenets I live my life by and I find forgiveness very, very hard.

Word.

I will say, though, as a woman who's obviously able but genuinely does not care about standard-definition success, that if you are going to be open and forthright about your lack of interest, you had better be prepared for rage. And I mean serious rage.

It's one thing, in these guys' eyes, for a woman not to care…