Rather than opine about what you wish to be true, would it not be more informative and professional to write about what is true?

I mean, they're making a claim that the less modest clothing correlates with these other issues (self esteem, eating disorder, yadda yadda). Is that a verifiable claim? Correlation does not imply causality. What other factors might be ultimately behind both?

Does the "can suffer when" language used in the article imply a causality that is not there in the actual study? Did you read the actual study?

Whether you personally think it's dangerous to report a fact or not is so irrelevant as to be laughable. Why not instead, if something doesn't sit right with you, investigate and find out what the actual claim is and if it is supportable?

I guess that is the difference between blogging and journalism in a nutshell right there. A blogger need only feel.

-m

I don't see the contradiction between accepting yourself as a person who has inherent worth as you are right now and looking to improve yourself.

Do you?

Did the bump cause them to win?

Maybe there was some other factor that caused both the bump and the win?

You just have to remember that the folks who read Kristol for the content don't have sufficient brain power to process irony...

It's just saying being pro obama is attractive to the girls in the photo (and presumably others of their ilk) and making an allusion to the Baez Sisters' poster of old.

I didn't get all that gatekeeper of the vagina stuff from a stupid ad - must be the ghost of 2nd wave feminism "rearing its head." Can't you see by the formulation in the ad that it is women who hold all of the sexual cards? Is that powerless?

Sarah is the most sensible commenter here. The others make me wonder if their outrage is feigned. And Ms. Hepola, I would love a bong cozy, but I don't date women who objectify men as just things that buy them beers.

Just curious...

I just want to point out that these women are not normal. Just because someone at salon drew a line connecting the stories of three female writers doesn't mean the average American woman has issues around sexuality. Certainly the women cited have big problems around their sexuality, but to me, they aren't necessarily representative of the population.

The woman who converted to Catholicism and is now "celibate" is a nut job; the sex addict equivalent of a dry drunk. Ms. Slater from the times is just an asshole and I hope that would-be husband of hers is smart enough to kick her sorry ass to the curb. The woman who just hasn't been getting any seems normal enough I guess.

Sex drive I assume has a range of normal levels, just like height. It's certainly true that stress and other environmental and/or health factors can influence sex drive, but that doesn't mean more is always better. The key is to match it up with what your needs are. If you need a lot of sex, don't date/marry someone who has tons of hang ups about it or who is just deadened to life. It's not that hard to figure out if you will be sexually compatible with someone, and even though a voice may tell you it sex shouldn't matter compared with love, it sure as hell does.

I'd be shocked if he weren't tortured. You think he is in there playing tiddlywinks?

Is a poor way to measure sexism. How do you know the context of the this is not your mother's/father's citation involves crossing so-called gender boundaries.

Also, greeneyed, they would of course not use nail polish to fix their nylons, but male polish har har har.

I like the idea of feminist women who despair the macho biting the bullet and making sure to bed as many sensitive males as possible. Call me up when that starts happening!

No thanks on that label. I believe in all kinds of things, just not McReligion.

Pay your goddamn taxes like the rest of us.

And as an Austinite I welcome the new course. It's going in right near my house.

I didn't read that in your write up, though.

I didn't read anything about how the sad sack unemployed man on the couch described in the cited article was a stereotype either, presumably because everybody knows it happens all the time!

How is it not just common knowledge that this is how these sorts of firms operate? Nobody who hasn't been living in a cave should be learning anything, because this is standard operating procedure.

First of all, saying something like "credible people don't believe X" is a load of crap.

Second of all, the description you give about the harm seems more akin to sugar than it does to tobacco or alcohol, which are much more harmful. Do we think of sugar as a harmful substance that needs to be regulated? Not usually but it fits the same description of harmful you offer.

Thanks for that - he is so talented.

You missed the fact that he was making big fun of Brett Michaels, late of Poison and star of Rock of Love, Rock of Love Bus, etc...

All justice is backwards facing...

Learn to spell.