...to have a president who isn't an idiot. It's refreshing to think that he can actually DO HIS JOB without starting wars or lending support to dictators.

While I'm sure the Republicans were pulling shenanigans largely because they could, reading aloud an amendment that was tacked on at 3am that morning actually doesn't seem like a bad idea. Make sure everyone has a chance to at least hear what they're voting for.

1) DADT is a legislative policy. While Obama could legally do something as a stop-gap measure, I can also see why (in light of the last presidency) he might want to restore executive power to a more historical level. LGBT activists could focus on lobbying the legislators who will, one way or another, have to appeal DADT.

2) He did *not* recommend patience. He specifically said that he understood the angry, hurt responses. The article's *author* says that may have won him some patience.

3) He has been in office 6 months, and has clearly prioritized some things (massive unemployment, cuts in public spending for critical social services, the Iran debacle, North Korea, public health care, to name a few) over LGBT issues. Whether those are good priorities is up for debate, but let's not pretend he's been sitting around twiddling his thumbs.

4) It is very aggravating to hear criticisms of Obama without any constructive suggestions for what he should be doing. It's annoying from Republicans on Iran, and it's annoying from Democrats about LGBT issues.

In conclusion: before condemning Obama, please remember the legal issues surrounding some of these policies, and contrast what he's doing with what he ought to (in your opinion) be doing.

Personally, I'm willing to let him have another year or so before saying he's failed and backed out of his campaign promises.

The reason this is inhumane while cattle on cattle trailers is not is that horses are build differently than cows. The author didn't elucidate this clearly, but horses are significantly taller, and their necks are much longer than cattle. Putting them on cattle trailers (particularly double-decker trailers with exceptionally low head room) often causes panic and head trauma for the horses who can't lift their heads properly.

Horses on horse trailers would be significantly better.

'Pop' knows Pop's gender. The parents and any other caregivers know Pop's gender. If Pop wanted to tell people what gender s/he is, then s/he can (or will be able to, once s/he learns to talk).

All these parents are doing is preventing strangers from imposing gender norms on an infant.

Seriously, people. This is not *at all* analogous to gender-(re)assignment surgery.

80% of spending is done by women because most women do all the shopping for their families. Women are usually the primary caregiver, so they're responsible for things like

grocery shopping

clothes shopping for children

buying school supplies for children

running errands (picking up dry cleaning, filling prescriptions, take the pet to the vet, etc.)

Feminists do actually complain about why it's unfair for social standards to place most of the housekeeping and maintenance burden on women.

Also, re: your interesting definition of feminism, you should be aware that the first line of the Wikipedia entry on the subject reads thusly:

"Feminism is an intellectual, philosophical and political discourse aimed at equal rights and legal protection for women."

Full text here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

I specifically point you to the section entitled 'Biology and Gender' for citations of modern feminist scholarship on the issue, which does not claim that all differences between the genders are social (just a lot/most).

that no matter how poignant the article, it brings out the sexists/racists.

@Stozzel

I doubt that you think about your race nearly as frequently as someone who is a minority. Unless you spend most of your time applying for scholarships or somesuch. Ex: I'm sure most of my coworkers are aware that they are male. I also doubt that they have their maleness shoved in their face as much as I do my femaleness. This is because as a guy, seeing only guys in a meeting doesn't trigger an 'ah, I am different' mental response. Me? I get to be reminded that I'm different *at least* 10 times a day. I assume it's probably a similar deal for minority races.

@Brightstar

Oddly, having read some of your letters in the past (just finished reading some about California), I always assumed you were a white middle class male. Something about your tone always screamed 'privileged'. So I wouldn't say you 'act like a woman ... on Salon.'

Secondly, for serious? "the two dimensional sadness that women like to foist on us"? Are you not aware that there are gender norms for women, and that the people who most voraciously enforce gender norms for either sex tend to be men? Arguably, it's merely because men are disproportionately in a position of power to use to enforce said norms, but still. Not to mention that this is grossly dismissive of the female-to-male trans folks.

Frankly, if the women you know think a "slam bam mentality" is "necessary from the men around them", you need to hang out with other women. I'd recommend openly avowed feminist women as generally open-minded and tolerant folks, but I somehow get the impression you wouldn't get along very well....

@maotsetung

I agree with you - I would be all for normalizing different clothing choices for men and women. I do think you are over-simplifying things, though. Both men and women can safely wear pants, true. But there are masculine outfits (suit & tie, baggy pants with visible boxers underneath) that probably get as funny looks as a guy in drag (based on the highly scientific sample size of 1 in the former case).

Finally, kudos to the author for writing so openly about such personal experiences.