Thank gosh for researchers telling us what we already know. But leave it to Broadsheet to blame it all on men.

The reason that women get fat once you live together is NOT that men serve them sausage and ice cream all day and turn them into porkers. As the article noted women are usually in charge of the food anyway.

The primary reason is that women who have a mate don't maintain the same level of attractiveness to keep him as they did to find him. So, they stop watching their weight, cut their long hair, stop wearing sexy shoes, etc.

This is much more noticeable in women than men b/c women get men based on looks. Men get women based on money, status, power, and behavior. So when women let themselves go it is much more noticeable.

There might also be something in there about storing energy for pregnancy. No doubt the regular smell of her man triggers some kind of crazy female hormonal thing which tells her to start adding weight, nagging about marriage, and complaining that your place is too small.

Finally, men eat larger portions, so when women eat with men there is more food to consume.

~

Men - Regardless of the exact cause this is a great reason to keep several women around town instead of putting all your eggs in one basket. Or ovary. Or whatever.

But if you gotta shack up, your best bet may be to keep her in a shed out back, only get together for sex (to limit any long-term hormonal responses), and keep her on a strict diet of fruit, veges, and water. Added bonus: she can have as many cats as she wants and they won't shit on your rug.

It's not elite, either. If you ever spent any time wandering around the ghetto you will see that poor Americans are hardly suffering a shortage of calories. On the contrary, they have too many calories. They are fat. The actual problem is too much sugar, caffeine, additives, sodium, alcohol, etc. But too few nutrients.

So for the same few bucks these people spend at McD's on a burger and fries they could get an organic onion and a can of sardines at Whole Foods. Prep time is the same. And if they did that they would be far healthier.

In fact, the whole free range issue with meat is easily resolved by not eating meat period. You don't need it. And with bird flue, mad cow, mercury in fish, etc. you are better off without it.

But none of this happens. Why? It's not money. It's culture.

Whole Foods is for white yuppies. Veges are for weenies. You can see the visercal, knee-jerk reactions right here. People feel threatened when you suggest better ways to live.

So, let the ignorant eat themselves to death as they wish, and have their self-righteous anger about it, too.

(Now *that* is an elite argument)

http://letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/04/07/leak_gaggle/view/?order=asc

Someone ought to give 'em an eaful.

It is one thing to continually mock men. But now you're making fun of 12 year old boys???

Yes, you feminists really are superior to middle school kids. Congratulations!

A 12 year old boy would do anything for a girl. Leave it at that.

But making a blog item to comment on it is just pathetic.

P.S. What is wrong with smelling good anyway?

The important thing to note here is that the ladies took $26 million in VC money and... started gloating.

The entrepreneurs who think they've "got it made" b/c they've got Stanford MBA's and a pile of cash have another thing coming. That's not how the Valley works.

Stories about those idiotic VC's who didn't invest in your business are appropriate AFTER you've made it. Or at least made your current VC's rich on the IPO.

Putting this out there now tells any experienced entrepreneur or investor (who may be your competition) that you think you were entitled to VC money, you think they're on a political mission to represent women, and YOU ARE DISTRACTED FROM YOUR BUSINESS.

Likely outcome: business failure.

I'm guessing the VC's in question feel they dodged a bullet.

But we'll see.

"Young men may be less likely than young women to experience sexual harassment or the negative effects of a "good ol' boy" workplace culture"

Really? Says who? This is propoganda. It would come as news to a lot of men.

Frankly, the problem for young women is that they got used to the coddling of feminist-infused liberal arts campuses where compassion for the quirky unusual literary character's struggle against the patriarchy etc. etc. ad barferatum is more important than being able to add.

Men do less well in college b/c a majority of female instructors would rather help another woman than a man. And concrete rational thinking is not so valued in many subject areas.

No surprise these coddled girls cannot fetch the coffee on time once they get to the real world.

Surely, though, some rich guy in the valley will cough up $26 mill to set them up in business though.

Why do you have to leave you shirts on, though?

You'd get a lot more support for public breast-feeding if the public got something out of it.

We single guys are already subsidizing all sorts of childcare and education costs via taxes.

At least we ought to be able to see the breast in question.

There is nothing sexier than a ripe, milk-laden titty.

I think it would be an esp. good way for single mothers to pick up a man.

Witness Broadsheet

By claiming environmentalism feminists alienate men.

This weakens the movement and lets extremists like Bush into power.

These extremists than wreak havoc on the world.

So the best thing the greens -- or progressives in general -- could do is put the feminists in a box and dump it in a toxic lake somewhere until after the elections.