then anyone who wanted to send something could blur their face, (the people who they want to know who they are would still know) but nobody would be in a position to do any damage because there would be no way to prove who the person was.

there are comparable numbers of old/ugly woman as there are old/ugly men i.e relatively few of either, you just have higher standards for men than for women.

are they really worse off or are they just falling farther because they were higher up to begin with. I think old/ugly men (unless they have some rarely high status) are as unvalued as old/ugly women. The difference is that lots of men aren't valued much when they are young either so it isn't such a big change.

I don't agree except to the extent that the premise is perhaps being oversold. She IS unstylish in a way that would really cost her in an environment that values it. Plenty of people in high school are considered "ugly" who really aren't and I think the show does a good job with this. If they tried to do a show about a woman in this situation who was truly painful to look at and they showed any kind of realistic response to her the show would not be pleasant to watch. So if they used a "realistically ugly" girl they would have to have a response to here that was wildly UNREALISTIC or they would have to make a show that no one could stand to watch.

is as insane as the others.

all the disadvantages that women suffer from are a patriarchal conspiracy. You must be from somewhere REALLY REALLY far away.

the "gorgeous" (sorry not beautiful) Glen Close more than qualifies

if ALL women are beautiful by definition (as your example seems to clearly imply) then your argument is impossible to lose and totally meaningless. The reason they don't use a real ugly girl to play ugly betty is that the show would be a real downer if they did. It would be torture to watch and no one would.

but not fat men. BTW there are as many ugly male actors as ugly female ones, i.e small numbers of both. The difference, as always, is that women EXPECT to be well regarded as a natural result of being alive whereas men know they are nothing unless by their actions they force the world to see them as something.

in this situation.

(and if there is it wouldn't be a pleasing substitution to the people who think "sexting" is too much)

everyone should be entirely supportive of resistance to this.

who wouldn't be less enraged if people would listen to them more, and people who can NEVER get anyone to listen are bound to be extremely frustrated. Obviously there is something wrong with people with autism but there are reasons why they do what they do.

Two questions:

Do people want to see real life in the movie

Why do they keep doing it if the audience doesn't like it

nearly all young men start out as social/sexual non entities and eventually some of them acquire enough social skills, status, etc. to be of some interest to someone.

now women are victims of the patriarchy because women can't (always, totally, and with complete lack of tensions) control men

that they can't get a hot i.e relatively young woman.

drugs, crude as they are, are probably the best that is likely to happen, that and more genetic understanding so that fewer of them are born in the first place.

Maybe they are no different than other people in this regard but what can control them? threats of jail or execution? Do you simply want to create a parallel justice and prison system for them Doctor? (since they obviously can't be dealt with in the regular one) or do you want to figure out some other way to deal with the violence of autistic people.

for the Republicans to agree to allow taxes on the wealthy to return to the levels of the communistic nightmare of the Reagan administration.

how vagina shaped skyscrapers or missiles would work.

constituency.

huh? I'm not sure what it means to glorify a sexual/reproductive organ through a non sexual/reproductive (i.e. erotic) perspective. Are there supposedly male examples of this.

Actually though I don't think the inconsistency is as great as you might think since it seems that when they do anal in porn everything is completely cleaned out ahead of time.

are shaped the way they are is purely functional. In a world of women who do and always had reproduced asexually they would look exactly the same.

but it really isn't the best, at least you can be pretty sure you won't get pregnant though.

Like I said I actually like certain female bodily fluids and am indifferent to others, so I trust that women like Betzee have the same combination of enthusiasm for some and indifference to other male bodily fluids. Otherwise they are the feminist version of the white house press corps.

obviously some people will never get it, or will pretend not to, the point though, if you are reachable but haven't been reached yet (although this seems unlikely), is that the question was idiotic. It was designed to generate some sense of emotional conflict and drama that supposedly would appeal to the audience (and do it in a SLIGHTLY less obviously idiotic/insane manner than faux news or flush) while being totally devoid of real informative value on any meaningful subject. The fact that, in contrast to the last eight years, we now have a president (but apparently not a press corps for the most part) that is interested in a real discussion rather than in the injection of toxic propaganda into the body politic is what so many people find so refreshing (and what wing nuts find either threatening or incomprehensible).