Fine! I Admit It! Bitches really are crazy.

I hate to sell us out, Ladies, but the fact is We Are F-ing Crazy. Not “crazy” in that “She’s off the hook!” way that carries somewhat of a positive connotation, suggesting power and a no-bullshit attitude. Nope. Full-on, fucked in the head, distorted perspective of reality, padded walls & buckled jackets type of “crazy”. It is hard to deny this fact when you stop & consider the way we see ourselves, each other, the whole of woman-hood. Who else but the truly crazy hate their bodies the way we do & try everything in their power to force their figures into impossible shapes and sizes? Who else but the mentally ill would subject themselves to such levels of self loathing rooted in aspects of our physical appearances that we have no control over? Is it not abnormal to have such distorted visions of ourselves, to be blind to our own fabulousness because one minor flaw sticks out in our minds above all else? What about the way we detach ourselves from our bodies? As if the mind & the bod were mutually exclusive entities; one having to babysit & regulate the other, which never seems to project the person we are inside no matter how little we eat, how much we spend on our beauty regime, or what ridiculous women’s magazine “advice” we follow to the letter. It’s not like being a female is one long trip to Wakko World; don’t get me wrong! At some point after high school is over, you learn to give yourself a break now & again. BUT, it never really goes away does it? You still have spats of the “crazy” & you still judge other females by the book’s cover, so to speak. Self-loathing is either less extreme these days or it’s so much a part of your day-to-day that you notice it less than you used to, but either way it’s still hanging around; dictating your wardrobe choices, shot-calling when it comes to how much time you spend “getting ready”, and regulating when it is that you draw attention to yourself. I mean, shit! Look at the way advertisers speak to our inner crazy person to convince us to purchase their crap! Even they know what is going on in our heads, just how distorted our body image actually is, even if we aren’t all that quick to admit it out loud.

This one here is an ad for breast augmentation. Look how happy & healthy (& scar free) she is with her new fake tits! Don’t you want to be happy & secure enough to frolic about top-less? Yeah? Then buy you some silicone falsies, undergo a notoriously painful surgery that will increase the likelihood of breast cancer going undetected in it’s early (& easiest to treat) stages, run a 25-40% chance of having to undergo a second surgery to correct issues associated with the initial implants, and get used to the idea that your formerly normal breasts may now “leak”, “rupture”, “deflate”, “harden” from the presence of scar tissue around the implant, or result in irreparable nerve damage! Maybe even develop a Connective Tissue Disease! Still smiling? Despite the availability of this kind of vital risk information (here’s the FDA’s page on the subject), a whopping 399,440 women in the United States still bought into the bullshit in 2007. It is projected that over the course of the next five years, up to 179,748 of those ladies will undergo a reoperation to deal with complications (this is the FDA’s conservative estimate, BTW). Sounds like self-destructive crazy bullshit, don’t it?

And what about the mind-fuck we’re handed where food is concerned? The first ad, for Calvin Klein panty hose, just screams “Suck it in!” and we all know that bitch*** ain’t in need of the tummy & bottom control panels described in the ad copy. Is that even the lower half of a woman? A definite lack of curvature, a signature trait of the human female, makes me wonder. The second ad is accompanied by the copy “The pair you wear to cooking class will also look fabulous at your weight loss seminar.” WTF? Seriously? Can you sell us shoes minus the food/weight issues, please? And what would that slim woman be doing at a weight loss seminar? Anyone? If she’s in need of a fatty seminar, I’m way over due. The third ad sells us chocolate as a substitute for another guilty pleasure, expensive shoes. Not chocolate for it’s own sake, y’know cause it’s chocolate & tastes good? Nope, Hershey’s would rather appeal to our fucked up system of rewards be being “good girls”. Behaved yourself? Alright, you can indulge in a pair of shoes or a chocolate bar (just ONE though, fatty-fat-fat!). I mean, a food item can be associated with any other set of wants & desires EXCEPT those associated with eating. God forbid you acknowledge the candy for what it is! If you thought about the neurotic assumptions behind all these ads; that you might eat something & therefore need an excuse or explanation for your behavior, that you might have (ekk!) curves as a result of that eating, that you apparently only wear shoes to places associated with food or fasting; you might be taken aback by the Anti-Fatty messages being (excuse me) shoved down your throat. Or you might just (sorry) ingest the Skinny Minnie Ideology, just like the 75% of Glamour Magazine readers who think their “too fat”. Even you smart chicks aren’t above the bullshit on this one – a study of Stanford undergraduate & graduate students found 68% of their sample group felt worse about their looks after exposure to ads like the ones above. Even more annoying is the discovery that as we age, we tend to compare ourselves to advertising models more often & since we’re less likely to bare a resemblance, we’re more likely to be disheartened & depressed by the imagery. *sigh*

***See? Hostility much?

 

Is it really surprising that we see ourselves as a mish-mosh of woman pieces rather than whole female humans? And is it too much to ask y’all in the ad world to hook us up with an entire woman in a mo’ fucking ad? This bits & pieces shit is creepy & it’s gotta’ go, y’all. Might have been “cutting edge” way back when, but I think we can agree that it’s tired now. Thanks for the complex though!

And finally, my most favorite line of crap that I am as likely as any other broad to buy into…

The Photo Shopped Skin in Beauty Product Advertisements! Never a flaw! Not in the teen years, the twenties, thirties, on up to however fucking old Diane Keaton is in those fucking L'Oreal ads. My bucks fly like confetti when these ads invade my space & I’m not even gonna’ front by telling you I don’t believe the crap I’m told in the ad copy. In fact, it’s probably the only bullshit I believe at face value, without question; it’s sort of my theological belief – that said beauty product shall bestow promised results upon the believer, Amen!

Crazy bitches or what? Honestly?

Rachel Maddow: Making the news something I can watch again!

I adore Ms. Rachel Maddow. It’s not because she’s the first openly gay anchor of a prime time news show. It’s not because she is a self-described feminist with obvious liberal political leanings. It’s not because she used to host one of my favorite Air America radio shows, Unfiltered, with none other than Public Enemy’s Chuck D. The main reason that I adore Rachel Maddow is she has made the news bearable for me to sit through. In this era of Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Chris Matthews, I find it excruciating to watch even a half-hour of televised news because the Talking Heads of the mainstream media outlets have the journalistic integrity of Stephan Glass and the debating skills of a toddler in the throws of a tantrum. They avoid asking the important questions & instead, waste my time by discussing the merits of Obama’s flag pin or whether America is ready for a female President. I blame these idiots for the downfall of our civilization since they are responsible for spreading the misinformation that so many Americans live their lives according to & they neglect their duty to keep the American people informed, thus perpetuating the idiotic state of the Republic. In contrast, Rachel Maddow keeps it real & handles the business at every weekday on her MSNBC show, The Rachel Maddow Show, which airs directly after Keith Olbermann’s Countdown & can be seen online at THIS website (or YouTube, if you want to avoid the repeticious commercial that MSNBC forces down your throat every two clips). If you have wondered where TV’s sane people are, look no further! Maddow & Olbermann host MSNBC’s most watched shows & that proves that plenty of other people are sick of O’Reilly’s guest abusing interview tactics and Chris Matthew’s idiotic (and sexist) commentary. Maddow’s show includes segments like Just Enough, where pop culture reporter Kent Jones runs us down on the fluffier side of the news, Talk Me Down, where Maddow goes head-to-head with experts on various issues that try to talk her down from her current opinion on the matter, Lame Duck Watch, where Maddow keeps tabs on Still President Bush, and Ms Information, where she calls out the important stories that have gone un- or under- reported. The show has enlightened my understanding of several current events (the stock market crisis, the auto industry loan-bailout) because Maddow has a way of breaking it down to lay-man’s terms without dumbing it down. She has taught me what a T-bill is, why we adjust the Atomic Clocks & why that even matters, and has explained The Bush Doctrine in terms of it’s illegal possibilities. She’s sarcastic, she’s smart, and she’s in-touch with the concerns & questions us Normal Folk have about the state of the Union. Whenever I don’t get specifics of a current political event, Maddow is my Go-To Gal. If I could be any TV personality it would be her (or, maybe, Samantha Bee).

Here’s a SHOCKER: Bill O’Reilly is a lying dick

Just for shits & giggles, I wandered over to Media Matters for America and browsed the list of Bill O’Reilly’s bullshit claims. I would advise you to avoid doing so if you are easily angered, because that mother-fucker… I’ll let his words do the talking (then I’ll do some talking)…

"Viagra is used to help a medical condition -- that's why it's covered. Birth control is not a medical condition, it is a choice. Why should I or anybody else have to pay for other people's choices?"  

That gem is from July 17, 2008, on The O’Reilly Factor, while discussing health insurance companies covering Viagra but not birth control. Unfortunately for O’Reilly’s accuracy, various international health organizations have, in fact, defined contraception as a medical necessity.

"[Sen. Barack] Obama must condemn organizations like MoveOn and the Daily Kos if he truly wants to run without a race component. These are the people that are dividing Americans along racial lines. It is not a stretch to say MoveOn is the new Klan."

From July 23, 2008, again on The O’Reilly Factor. Actually, Bill, it’s quite a big fucking stretch. On one hand you have The Klan, a group born out of the post-Civil War racism of the South that advocates white supremacy & uses terrorist tactics to suppress the civil liberties of others. The Klan has lynched people, erected burning crosses on front lawns, and physically assaulted un-affiliated Americans since 1865. On the other hand you have Moveon.org, a non-profit progressive advocacy group born out of the Clinton impeachment fiasco that promotes public understanding of political issues. Moveon.org has created poignant commercials criticizing the current Administration, raised money for Democratic candidates nationwide, and published two books on modern political issues since 1999. Big fucking difference.

"But it's an amazing amount of kids involved with this -- 20 -- in an affluent school district. This isn't, you know, the inner city; you would think that these kids would have some kind of a values system."

On June 10th, 2008, again on his stupid fucking “news” show, this is how he responded to a story about seven ninth-graders at Pascack Valley High School in New Jersey that were suspended for distributing topless photographs of their classmates. Apparently, only rich folks teach their children about morality and “values”. Us po’ kids gotta’ learn that shit on the street!

What a dick. He’s a dick squared, even.

Haven’t they heard the phrase “Shit rolls downhill”?

                       

Here’s the problem I’m having with the media’s coverage of our state’s financial woes: California has one of the lowest home ownership rates in the nation & has been criticized for years because a huge cross section of it’s population is doomed to permanently rent their homes. So, when the talking heads on my late night news shows discuss the foreclosure crisis (which has slammed Stockton, CA harder than any other city nationwide with 1 out of every 75 homes being foreclosed on in the month of May 2008), why aren’t they talking about how it is affecting us renters? Kitty-corner from my apartment, a four unit apartment building has just been foreclosed on & the people living there are pretty much up shit creek sans paddle. The property owner is obviously strapped for cash, so I doubt the four families will see their security deposits anytime soon, and the bank that has assumed ownership of the property has kicked out the renters but doesn’t owe them any thirty day notice or financial compensation for their loss, even though none of them are at fault for their eviction. Disposed renters are given only 72 hours to vacate their homes and then they face the task of finding a new rental unit, not to mention coming up with another first month’s rent and security deposit. What are these people supposed to do? They were already renting a low-income apartment, so I doubt that any of them are wealthy enough to up and move at the drop of a hat. What are we, as a community, doing for these people? AND WHY does the mainstream media act like the only people facing economic troubles related to the foreclosure crisis are those folks that defaulted on their loans? What about the renters? People that have been paying their rent, people that have abided by the tenants of their leases, people on Section 8, people already in dire financial straits because of rising gas and food costs, people that don’t have the credit or income necessary to get a fucking loan in the first place are being evicted left & right. Many of these people don’t know that their homes are in the foreclosure process, since the property owner is not required to relinquish this information to their tenants, and then one day…*POOF*… their rights to their place of residence are gone because foreclosing lenders typically evict tenants in order to re-sell the property. Someone that looses the house they bought & live in to foreclosure can rent another house. They already make enough money to qualify for a home loan, so they have the cash needed to rent & property managers don’t give a damn about that aspect of your credit, so they won’t have trouble getting a spot. Renters thrown out because their landlord defaulted on a loan are not in a similar financially secure position. So what if you’ll have trouble getting another home loan ‘cause your credit is fucked? Those renters are having trouble getting another roof over their heads because someone else fucked up! Now that is a situation that deserves some hard-hitting journalistic attention! I’ve scoured the Internet in search of articles, segments, or op-eds on the subject, but it’s slim pickings.

Approximately 1/3 of Americans rent their homes and in California that figure shoots up to 42%. The available evidence suggests that the majority of foreclosed properties are likely to be rentals (or multi-unit dwellings, like duplexes or triplexes), since a property owner isn’t likely to default on their own home loan before the loan they have out on their rental properties.** Estimates for how many renters are being royally screwed by the crisis are inaccurate and incomplete at this point. Experts warn that the current data grossly underestimates the numbers of disposed renters. What figures we do have suggest that as of 2007, 22% of defaulted mortgages in California were on rental properties. In other words, at least 1/4 of the homes lost are those of people that have no part in the whole loan-situation to begin with! And you know that plenty of rentals house more than one tenant (apartment buildings & multi-unit houses, for example), so counting the number of foreclosed rentals doesn’t even begin to show us how many people are being screwed over. Worse still, all those former homeowners are now joining the ranks of the renting class and, according to the laws of supply and demand, are driving up the cost of renting for everybody. U.S. Census Bureau statistics show a 14% jump in the nation’s median asking rate for rentals since 2003 and California is famous for it’s inflated rental rates, so you know it’s worse around here! Woe is the West Coast renter, I suppose.

On July 8th, Governor Swart..z… the fucking Gubernator signed into law Senate Bill 1137, the so-called Perata/Bass Mortgage Relief Bill, which requires tenants to be notified once a bill of sale is issued on the property and, once sold, tenants now have 60 days notice before their eviction…BUT only if the defaulted loan was taken out between January 2003 and December 2007. Now, these innocent parties have two months to pull a shit load of money out of their asses, find a new place in an increasingly cramped rental market, AND prepare to pay more rent each month to boot! Good looking out, California!

Here are a couple Stockton-specific annoyances this subject has planted in my head:

1. Why does the city General Plan include a few more Spanos & Grupe housing developments between now & 2013 if we can’t afford the homes we’ve built thus far? Why are we OK-ing more single family home development if predictions suggest the need for more multi-unit rentals? Shouldn’t a General Plan consider this type of shit? Isn’t that why we make a fucking General Plan? To generally plan for the future’s needs?

2. Why is The Record ignoring the foreclosure crisis as it relates to us renters? Aren’t the editors aware of the fact that many Stocktonians rent? Don’t they have a duty, as our main news outlet, to inform the citizenry of regional disaster like this, rather than use any article on the subject to paint faux-silver linings all over the fucking place? How about giving renters a heads up, in case they didn’t know they should be worried?

3. Where is the federal bailout for the poor victims of this crisis, like Stockton’s needy masses? How does Washington justify multi-million dollar bank bailouts for lenders that profited from the mortgage refinancing schemes and sub-prime loans that caused the crisis, when innocent displaced Stocktonians are too broke to cough up the cash for their security deposits? Why aren’t our tax dollars being used to protect us from poverty? From homelessness? From predatory financial entities bent on profit at any cost?

 

** Also, this assumption was stolen from a 2008 report issued by the  National Low-Income Housing Coalition, located HERE.

Apparently, everyone finds our political process ridiculous!

This one is from the What The Fuck Files: BBC News actually has a section on their website devoted to our 2008 Elections titled “Flip-Flop Guide”, which briefly describes the “changes of heart” that Obama and McCain have made on various issues. How the fuck is that useful? Helpful? Needed? Is it just me?

The Mainstream Media is many things, but “progressive” isn’t one of them

Rush Limbaugh is one of the most laughably ignorant blowhards in the country, yet people tune in to his programs & actually base their opinions on the shit he says. Sad, scary, and fucking stupid all at the same time. Thank you, feministing and Samhita, for this week’s Friday Feminist Fuck You devoted to the fat bastard, himself!

Fox News gets clowned by a comedian that says exactly what most of us have wanted to for sometime now. Thank you, Dude.

Comic
by luvnews

  President Bush was given a much-deserved hard time during a July 4th celebration at Thomas Jefferson’s historic estate, Monticello. For some reason, media outlets responded to the protester’s actions with shock or as if the shouts of “war criminal” and "fascist" we undeserved. At the moment, a video of the event is the most popular video on the BBC News website, located HERE. I swear, the newscasters, those Talking Heads on American TV, cannot be as dumb as they pretend to be. How could anyone be surprised by an Independence Day protest against the President? I'll bet he expected to be heckled, for fuck's sake.

Sarah Haskins

The feminist blogosphere has fallen head over heels in love with Sarah Haskins and I must confess that I, too, am crushing on the lady behind those clever Target Women segments from infomania. Lately, it seems like every time I start to question some ridiculous aspect of our media culture, Haskins has already called it out in her segment (Yogurt, I’m talking to you)! Thank you, Sarah, for delivering our weekly dose of media insanity just how we prefer it – dry, sarcastic, and relevant. Here’s a few of my favorites…

This segment, titled “Suffrage”, addresses how the media & our Presidential candidates are approaching American women in the post-Hillary world.  The Hit-The-Nail-On-The-Head statement: “You know what makes me angry? Watching you talk about how angry I am.”

The infamous “Yogurt” edition of Target Women brought up a slew of good points regarding the way yogurt is advertised to women (THINK: those annoying Yoplait ads where the two chicks one-up each other’s declarations about how good the shit is - “This is like not catching the bouquet good!”).

A much needed Rude Awakening about the ridiculousness that is Botox.

Proof! See! I’m not crazy!

Most folks listen to my conspiracy theories regarding the City of Stockton, it’s beloved developers, and the complacent local media just to be kind. They nod their heads, offer half-hearted agreements, & their internal monologue goes something like this: “What the fuck is this bitch talking about? Did she skip her meds today?”. Fortunately, I am undaunted by the skepticism of others; I have plenty of my own, Thank you very much! Anyhow, all y’all nay-sayers (or nay-thinkers) can’t possibly deny the blatant example of my Stock-town conspiracy perched on the front page of today’s paper. The headline read: Brown puts pressure on Stockton. According to The Record, the city’s General Plan is being attacked by leftist-tree huggers backed by the state Attorney General Jerry Brown. The tone of the article suggests that Brown is involving himself in issues that do not concern him and is probably motivated by his own political ambitions (Governor in 2010!). I planned on relaying The Record’s retarded opinion sarcastically, but those two sentences annoyed me enough. Here’s the deal: Stockton, like other cities of similar size, has developed a General Plan (The Record calls it “landmark”, just like they called the stadium downtown a “can’t lose situation for the city of Stockton”). Our General Plan conveniently falls in line with the business plans of A.G. Spanos and Grupe; it allows previous zoning regulations to be disregarded so that these cocksuckers can erect more housing developments on the edges of town (houses that Stocktonians can’t afford, that the current infrastructure can’t support, and that the local community cannot possibly benefit from). The Sierra Club and the Morada Area Association (residents of the eastern edge of SJ County) sued the city, charging that the Plan was environmentally hazardous, detrimental to the community, and just plain sucky. These concerns should have been taken seriously by City Council, by the mayor, by the local news media, by the citizenry since our air & water quality is atrocious. We’ve been cited by the State plenty of times for our ham-handed approach to the Valley’s environment & any resident will attest to the nasty taste of our air. Still, the local government and it’s subordinate media arm present the law suit as an annoyance, not an actual concern. Attorney General Jerry Brown is considering intervening in the law suit to force Stockton to address the concerns of it’s inhabitants and abide by state laws that are clearly broken in the General Plan– y’know, doing the job we elected him to do. But, The Record clearly implies that his involvement is not wanted by the political machine running this joint, as evidenced by the following excerpts from the article:

• “It is not unusual for Brown to involve himself in local land-use policies. Since the state in 2006 enacted legislation requiring California to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Brown has pressured agencies across the state to account for the impact of growth on emissions blamed for global warming.” READ: This mother-fucker is always getting in other people’s business.
• “Stockton's General Plan refers several times to the phasing of development. It also addresses global warming, having been revised to do so prior to the plan's adoption, after activists complained. The plan obligates the city to adopt policies requiring that new development reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” READ: What more do these whiny Environ-pussies want us to do? Gawd!
• “Representatives of developers A.G. Spanos Cos. and The Grupe Co. - two companies with significant interests in the General Plan - had heard Brown was interested in Stockton but said they did not know to what end.” READ: The only people that need to be concerned with the city’s General Plan are the one’s posed to make a killing on it.
• “Brown, a Democrat, is a former governor of California and mayor of Oakland and is widely considered a likely candidate for governor in 2010.” READ: So all this bullshit is just part of his political agenda!

Dudes & dudettes, read the article and try to believe the bullshit contained within. It is next to impossible.

CNN: Clearly Not News

* By the way, CNN U.S. did not have a piece on the Iraq War fund debacle listed on it's homepage. What was important to include on the first page of the CNN site? The following retarded shit:

-"Why Israel is Talking to those Bush will not": A 'No Shit' article about why Israeli leaders talk to those nations that pose terrorist risks (like Lebanon, Iran, Egypt) instead of proceeding with unilateral warfare against the dissenters (a la Bush).

- Obama criticized over Auschwitz claim Another stupid attempt to discredit the Democratic forerunner by 'blasting' him for saying that his uncle helped to liberate the captives at the Nazi concentration camp. Auschwitz was liberated by Soviet soldiers and Obama meant to refer to the Buchenwald camp, but the Republican National Committee jumped at the chance to sully Barack's record on matters of defense. Not only did he incorrectly name the wrong camp, the RNC wants you to know that Obama's uncle didn't serve in WWII. It was his great uncle! Fucking Liar!

- Bush 'troubled' by activist's detainment But not by the 300+ detainees at Gitmo, huh? The article is referring to the 5-year detention of Myanmar's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Dubya called on Myanmar to release all it's political prisoners and to open dialogue with Suu Kyi (*stifled laugh*). He actually called on "Burma" to do this, but the nation of Myanmar hasn't been known as "Burma" since the military coup of 1988. Excuse me for my presumptuousness, but shouldn't the leader of our nation be knowledgeable about the NAMES of countries he intends on giving advice? And shouldn't someone be responsible for making sure Dubya's hypocrisy is a little less obvious?

Remember what I said about not ignoring main stream media? Disregard that statement.

Women’s News = Fluff, Fat, and Fashion!

I never bother to read any section of a newspaper directed specifically to women, because it's usually celebrity oriented swill, diet advice, fashion tips, recipes, and etiquette or advice from Ann Landers, Ms Manners, or Dear Abby. Not only do I find this boring & condescending, I also think it's inaccurate to label these topics as "women's" reading. The only person I knew that ever read Dear Abby was my ex-boyfriend. My former roommate was a male that couldn't get enough of celebrity gossip. The fashion and culinary worlds are dominated by male moguls (think Ralph Lauren, Wolfgang Puck, etc.). And to be entirely honest, why is a Women Only section necessary, unless a newspaper or periodical is aware of the fact that their editors don't approach women's issues as worthy of space in the rest of their pages? Recently, my hometown newspaper announced it's new weekly insert, San Joaquin Woman, and (as you may have guessed) I "missed" it's debut issue. For some reason, I can't even find reference to it on the paper's website & I think that says a whole lot about how important it's content must have been. The Wall Street Journal has also announced a female-specific section of it's publication. "Journal Women" has it's own webpage & (Surprise!) it's more of the same crap-o-la I mentioned above. It's headline Health & Wellness article is about suggested alternatives to the gym (as opposed to a piece on heart disease, the 1 killer of American women, or breast/cervical/uterine cancers), followed by a reminder that "mindless munching" isn't healthy (OMG! Really? I never knew that!). It's Style and Dress section has a particularly obnoxious article about showing too much cleavage at work related dinners (ANY female that has ever had boobs is well aware of the ruckus they can cause & we hardly need the Wall Street Journal to reiterate it to us. Fuck y'all, it ain't like we can leave them at home! My opinion about cleavage? The only reason it is cast as derogatory is because straight men are sexually aroused by boobs. It isn't our responsibility to make sure dudes are focused on work instead of our chests, so the WSJ can fuck off with their titty advice.). Journal Women also includes a blog titled "The Juggle", an obvious reference to the "juggling act" that working mothers struggle with. Apparently, the WSJ still buys into the mythology that working fathers aren't strapped with parenting duties that conflict with their work schedules. Working while parenting is difficult for everybody & perpetuating the notion that women have to perform a "juggling act" that men don't only backs up the stupid idea that men aren't (or shouldn't) be involved in child rearing like mothers or that women aren't competent enough to approach both tasks like men do.

People (usually guys) ask me why we need Women's History Month or magazines like Ms and this is exactly why! Because the "real" news or history excludes us. Bullshit inserts & separate sections for women only perpetuate the idea that we are somehow separate from the rest of society and our concerns or achievements aren't important to anyone but ourselves. To that I say: Penis envy, my ass! We suffer from spotlight envy, if anything! 

Bitches ain't shit, but Hoes & Tricks

Really, Dude? Sexism didn't play a role in the anti-Hillary campaign because deserves to be labeled a bitch since she's "tough", "aggressive", and "abrasive"? This guy is for real? Somebody needs to define "sexism" for the guy before they allow him to speak on it.

Women Hating Women (and the University that loves them)

- Phyllis Schlafly sucks. Here's a CNN piece on the Washington University hoopla.