so, are you that unclear as to what radfems are? Or do you honestly think that it's a radical notion that women aren't supposed to be the gatekeepers of sexual assault? To the point you need to spend all your effort on explaining to the poor helpless women around you to avoid rape instead of taking your issue up with…

Wait a few months, they might readjust when the mood suits them.

oh ok, that's how wide we're casting this net!

funny? It's hilarious!

you don't see how those two things do not logically follow each other? How supporting birth control does not equate with supporting the starvation of children? How they are completely separate issues being mashed together to try and invalidate someone's point by trying to make them say something they are not?

super patronizing. And who the fuck says "trained my sister"?

yeah, because those two things are totally comparable? The right to take your camera out and the right to just be a woman in public acting like any other human is allowed to act?

sorry, but the lack of support for your comment is not due to everyone missing your point. We've heard it a million times. They genuinely see what you're saying and have made it very clear why it is still problematic. Why is it so hard to get this point across to you?

FACEPALM!

this question is nonsense.

what about the fact that it is devoid of logic? Well, except that folks who don't want to have kids will still have to deal with this because they can't get birth control. Or maybe they're totally jazzed to have the kids the do but can't afford to have anymore and can't afford the damn birth control while they're…

bullshittery. I'm sorry you were harassed, but the conclusions you're drawing from a pretty bizarre incident don't follow. Yes, you have the right to do whatever you want - feminism agrees. I don't think that's the kind of street harassment that most women deal with every day and I don't think feminism would support…

Jackhammer nitro chicken scratchers with al dente pinto pops.

No, 25 years is not the minimum time served before parole eligibility in Canada for a life sentence unless it meets certain criteria. Generally (and skipping over a lot of exceptions that aren't relevant here for the sake of explaining what people mean when they talk about a Canadian life sentence) the 25 years…

the article is a little misleading. First because it doesn't expand on what a life sentence is in canada (rarely ever actual life, and never in a case like this) or the fact that a life sentence is the max she could get for this charge not what any reasonable person or court would hand down in this particular case. So…

and even then she'd be paroled way before that. I'm not terribly sure why we call them life sentences! I'm not saying that in a way that's supposed to be approving or disapproving, to be clear (in my head, reading that sounded like one of those people who say stuff like that as if it's supposed to be a scathing…

life sentence is canada doesn't really mean life sentence unless you're a serial killer. In which case you still have the theoretical possibility of parole, but if you are Clifford Olson you're definitely never going to get it (he's dead, so he never did. But he tried). They have a lot of leeway as far as her sentence…

oh yeah, just a smidge! I like to specify any OKC profiles I make with a no genocidal starvation ever dealbreaker. Such high standards

dafuq? That button pic looks like don draper!

so?