But wait! I read that asking people to get active consent is going to ruin sex 5ever (that's one more than 4ever).

I am a sucker for seersucker. I immediately assumed that this ban was because stripes look weird and wavy on TV. They clearly do not realize how many young, hip Southern men and women rock the seer. And with good cause, it is light weight and devilishly handsome!

I would really love to know how many of the respondents had ever HAD a female boss.

Trees that kill?

TL;DR, you are not speaking Latin, you nimrods*.

Have you ever made a call where you just HOPE the person doesn't answer and you can just leave a message? I have. So I'm totally with you here!

Pfft. I think you and the author of that high-faloootin librul rag need to learn the difference between boot straps and welfare.

Comparisons to apartheid are pretty fair, honestly.

I guarantee you that whatever was said, it sure as hell wasn't half as bad as the things you hear about middle easterners at your average Bar Mitzvah reception.

I'm your huckleberry. Enjoy my spittle-flecked invective, which you will just have to imagine as I don't actually have the energy to be an asshole (at this time). Imma outsource this job to a dog.

The best part of his letter is the disclaimer at the end:

Do NOT contact me with unsolicited services or offers.

The truth is that, except in the first flush of infatuation, both partners are rarely equally excited. At any given moment, one person wants sex more passionately than the other. What's more, whether due to nurture or nature, there is usually a difference in tempo between men and women, with women generally requiring…

The truth is that, except in the first flush of infatuation, both partners are rarely equally excited. At any given moment, one person wants sex more passionately than the other.

It seriously sounds like she has a fearful, non-consenting sex life and I felt pity for her feeling the need to defend that.

also, it's not like "a trusted friend" has ever been the one to sexually assault a "victim" before, right?

The attitude of "it can't happen to me" is the wrong attitude. The right attitude is "I won't let it happen to me!"

Treading carefully here, but are you speaking about the police article, or the interpretation by the writer?

Let me put it another way: walking around blindfolded, you could get killed even if no one else does anything wrong.

You can never get raped even if no one else does anything wrong.

That's why that comparison is moronic.

Inspired by Boondocks cover, I like to explain "I have a right be hostile"

It's a strange choice for a cover, considering all of the talk about her pictures and etc. I get that the "it's my body and it's my choice" could play into it, but why does her mouth need to be open? I am very on the fence about this entire photo. Gah.