No one was laughing at "rape victims" because fictional characters in a comic strip are not real. They are collections of pixels on your computer screen and thus cannot be "rape victims." "Dickwolves" are also not real.

I believe that you are hearing them say "you are too disgusting to date" but I don't believe that's what they are actually saying.

Set yourself on fire and post pictures.

You sound like as big a piece of shit as Tebow. Do the minorities of the world a favor and slash your own throat.

Because here at the Serious Feminist Website posters still judge whether a person is Literally A Nazi Rapist or a feminist hero (and of course, there is never, ever and in-between) based on whether they look like the cute boy next door they'd like to go out with. James Deen is just as much of a scumbag as everyone…

No, it falls under the Obama-warrior nature of the site. Can't focus on Manning going to prison for 35 years for talking about war crimes because the Messiah's government is doing that to him/her, so let's focus on stupid shit like what song Fox News played.

You're missing the point exactly as I said. Yes, we can go in circles about what MRA shitheads believe and how to properly align ourselves with proper victimization theory, or we can focus on the fact that for 90 to 99 percent of men, raping someone is totally not in their vocabulary, and identifying and neutralizing…

Absolutely. And it's not just an academic argument to dispute the myth that "all men are rapists" who need to be "educated"—spreading the idea that the impulse to rape is a normal thing also legitimizes it in the ones who are inclined to do it. They don't view themselves as deviants who need to seek help, they view…

Well, because, as should be apparent from this story and common sense, ideological non-sexual nudity is a big bag of nonsense and people who do this are just getting off on it.

Remember the Left-Wing Totem Pole:

I'm glad at least one of the "pitbull? never heard of a pitbull. those don't exist, I think you made them up" tendentious types who show up on every article about pitbulls maiming someone for no reason didn't forget it on a pro-pitbull story.

Whatever. Saying "We want more than 13% of editors to be women" and then saying "women should only work on articles that comprise probably 1/100,000th of the site and are edited mostly by women already" are mathematically incompatible with each other, unless you plan on having every gender studies article edited…

Wouldn't it be better for women to write about all topics instead of ghettoizing themselves to the gender studies echo chamber? How can the overall imbalance be fixed if women only work on less than 1% of the articles?

"Gays aren't a protected class so this isn't discrimination" was used as the argument for everything until very recently. A slavish devotion to "the law is what it is" precludes changing it or thinking about larger moral implications.

You're gonna get rid of the notion that Jezebel is an anti-humor void that Lindy West's war on comedy has created, by talking about how awesome you think MadTV is.

"They're not the same because they're not the same" is a bad argument.

Of course, Manning could pursue any gender identity he or she wishes, including to get surgery or not, were it not for the Democratic President whose administration just put him or her in prison for 35 years for telling the truth about war crimes. A few people trolling for pageviews by saying mean things about the…

Making "civil rights" synonymous with "black religious leaders" has had utterly disastrous consequences for gays, women, immigrants, atheists, and pretty much everyone besides those black people with connections to the church. Are we allowed to talk about this now?

The lines between Russian Orthodoxy and the Russian state/Putin are more blurred than whatever Robin Thicke is yammering about. Their beliefs are the law.

Because his view is wrong and evil. What is this, a trick fucking question?