Funny how some people read one word or line and essentially ignore everything else that was written. She said it was equal parts sex and violence. I guess using logic instead of emotion to make an argument is taboo here?

And I also agree that spouting statistics such as "x crime occurs every y seconds" really serves no purpose to the average reader. It's meant to incite a particular response, but I'm guessing it only serves to reinforce the lack of belief in the accusation. Every 17 seconds? We'd be tripping over encounters on our way to the water cooler! Reporting in such a manner undermines the real magnitude of the issue by reducing it to nothing but a statistic.

Also, another classy response from "anonymous." Presumably a rapist?

is more about getting one over than the topic at hand. I suppose everyone is just supposed to buy into the pop-psychology and nothing more. If this is a "liberal" forum, which I didn't realize it necessarily was, then the concern should be with regard to how quickly any thought but the consensus is shouted down.

You can't parrot the line about rape have nothing to do with sex, mock others for thinking a bit differently, and then say you're the one thinking for herself. There is certainly quite a bit of evidence to support the notion that domination and aggression are prime motivators for rape, but if those were the only motivations then the attacks would be manifested differently. Sexual gratification is a partial motivation in some attacks. The problem here seems to be that people view rape as simply one kind of assault, when in reality it takes many different forms. If you're going to portray yourself as someone who thinks outside the box, don't immediately attack those who actually do.

ACG

Please note, I didn't jump on. On the contrary, it was the other way around. And now you are twisting my words. Is this your MO?

The point here is that many seem to have glommed onto the pop-psychology that says all rape is about domination and nothing to do with sex itself. But that is not only not completely accurate, it continues the notion that one rape is identical to another, and that simply isn't the case.

Further, the fact there are victims here in this forum who feel their assaults were at least party motivated by sexual gratification undermines the "official" hypothesis. It isn't false, just misleading. That there are so many opinions should itself be another indicator that this isn't a cut-and-dry issue.

This is a forum, and as such a place for (attempted) civil discourse. If you aren't willing to listen to opposing ideas, a forum is perhaps not the best hangout.

Um, I'm curious... what good do you think birth control would do for a group of girls who collectively decided to get pregnant. This wasn't an accident; didn't come about because they were all promiscuous and didn't use protection. This was a plan. I think the town is misguided in their pursuit of Catholic ideals, but that's just my opinion and has no bearing overall. Try not to make every issue a platform for nonsensical associatons.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic, Kite. Did the principal reveal their blood types or further medical history? If not, then I don't seen any violations.

If you can get your hands on one, I suppose. They grossly underestimated demand for these vehicles, and now what is supposed to be a very efficient and inexpensive vehicle is available only to those willing to shell out almost twice the retail price on Ebay and other secondary sales sites. Revolutionary? Their execs certainly aren't.

unless you're one of the loutish Americans who feels the need to announce their presence upon every entrance, it seems you're the one with the misplaced ire. If you've traveled abroad much, you know exactly of whom I speak. If that's you, then we are indeed embarassed. If it isn't, wear your fanny-pack with pride. And enjoy the sights!

What specific offense were we inherently supposed to acknowledge here? And is drudging up a story about a WWII female spy really a corollary to this? Lazy, ladies, just lazy.

Wait... people make fun of supermodels for being vapid creatures that starve themselves in pursuit of a fake ideal; behaving like celebrities for having the luck to be born with no body fat and a pretty smile; for having the physical stature of a human coathanger... and now you're mad at a guy for being honest about his job, which is to make those coathangers look fashionable? Hmmmm... perhaps Broadsheet needs to get out more.

I think an obvious one might be cajoling the public for eating up the gossip rags... as you report on something you find distasteful in a gossip rag. As the first poster said, it's mostly women trolling Perez Hilton's disgusting site; you're the enablers of this trend. But then, what would you do otherwise?

because they advocate being responsible with our tax dollars instead of just blindly giving it away? Please explain this logic. Or just rant some more. Either or.

Given your title, and the effort made in the article itself, do you actually mean we should blame Rihanna and not your beloved feminism?

Is any criticism of feminism ever warranted, or is this just a column and forum for those who already agree?