But fainting and headaches already are established side effects of Gardasil. As with lots of side effects, it's not known why some people experience particular effects and others don't. Maybe this group is just more susceptible.

I have never heard anyone say "nip it in the butt" or otherwise mess up the expression, and was also confused by your comment until you clarified. (Does that make sense? I was kinda like "but why would someone say 'nip it in the butt'? It must mean something, but what?! TELL ME. ) "Butt" in this context, at least to…

How awful. I'm guessing her friends didn't report it to the police either -

Yikes, I'm sorry you went through that.

A police department that doesn't "want" evidence of predators attempting to rape people should not be catered to.

It occurs to me that all the rape drug awareness campaigns I've come across have centered on women keeping their drinks covered and not leaving them unattended, without any attention to reporting incidents of this crime (and, where possible, prosecuting the perpetrators). I would guess there are tests that can confirm…

And even if someone doesn't know who did it, reporting this to the police could be valuable. Just having official records that the crime occurred could be useful in a zillion ways, and in some circumstances the police might actually be able to figure out who did it even if the person who received the drink can't.

I don't think that not being able to identify the perp should inhibit someone from calling the police. Just having official records that the crime occurred could be valuable in so many ways (especially when there is indisputable evidence of its occurrence). And the fact that the crime occurred would (or should?)…

Reading this and other comments on this thread makes me wonder, how often do people go to the police when they suspect a drink has been drugged? And if not, why not? What kind of outreach and support is out there for this problem, and how much of it is focused on actually catching and prosecuting the offenders?

Given evidence that a rape drug has been added to someone's drink, the default response would be to call the police IMMEDIATELY. How is this even a question?

What do you find disturbing about it?

Great post, thank you.

Dear Ladies of the ADL:

Yeah, I totally appreciate that. I just think there's a lot of misinformation out there about this stuff, and that better info takes a lot of digging that most folks don't have the time or interest level for. One aspect of that is that there do seem to be good reasons to not just make another gum or patch.

Not disagreeing with what you're saying exactly, but the similarities between e-cigs and cigarettes can be helpful to people who are smokers. It allows them to control their nicotine dose in much the same way that they're used to controlling their dose with cigarettes*. Not having this kind of fine control over dose…

Weirdly, Pew's polling questions and conclusions about religion in the US often seem to come from a place of cluelessness about the actual complexities of religion in the US — or anywhere, really. It's like their ideas about religion come from watching a few old episodes of Crossfire.

I am curious about how folks in this thread view Joe Biden as compared to Hillary Clinton.

It was interesting to see that Monica Lewinsky said the same in her Vanity Fair piece.

hmm, I can see the pre-video ad on my Android but not the actual video.

apologies if I'm mentioning something you're already familiar with, but you might be interested in reading Julia Serano on this stuff if you haven't already