sidney_b

Several times, a long time ago.

How? I don't really remember, but I know for a few of them, I ran them with a few friends and colleagues.

Well, it depends. The decent, honorable, correct thing is to ask for their consent.

But if you don't really want to be friends with them, want to start some internets drama, and be kind of a jerk, you don't have to.

Either way, if the story's told well, it'll be good. It's just that with the latter case, there'll be a humorous gossip-y side story too.

But in the interest of harmony, I'd recommend not doing that.

Oh, that movie. Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb.

(I do <3 that movie, but for its campiness.)

I think I may be tipsy enough to argue this.

Charlotte was a stupid little girl who was too idiotic and blind to ever consider that her whiny, sniveling desire to be a kept woman crippled her as a person.

Samantha was fine. Her libertine ways were her expression of her power.

Carrie was a masochist who ended up with Mr. Big, who was, honestly, a really lousy person.

Miranda was smart, sassy, and blessed with a sharp wit; she might have lacked a bit in the self-awareness arena, but her major flaw (i.e., the inherent contradiction of her viewpoints with her unrequited desires) were at least understandable, and characteristic of anybody in our generation.

*blinks*

Wow.

I stand corrected.

Aren't you glad you cut us free?

No, see... By taking you seriously, I was being the humourless feminist that never finds anything funny at all, ever, because I'm just so angry at the patriarchy for being the man, any man, rawr...

Well, yeah. He sounds like he's from Cupertino, ca. 1993.

Never meant to imply you weren't. At least you're willing to admit it, which is something far too many people these days refuse to do.

To be perfectly fair to her, she never actually said that she'd done this. That said, many of the things she did say *wink* and do were *wink* so much worse *wink*.

I don't think Lysistrata would really work in real life.

I don't necessarily think that that's the natural conclusion of the sexual revolution. It's not like the "glorious" "Communist" "revolution" in which the proletariat somehow gets to live in a utopian tyrrany of the mediocre majority at the end of it all...

It is an unfortunate trend, but the wording of that post was very vague. I personally think feminism gets a bad rap; it gets blamed for a lot of things not its fault, like anything certain political groups pin on it. (Don't get me wrong, feminism is to blame for lots of things, but it should only be blamed for the bad things its actually actively caused, like a certain ex-governor.)

But yes, the last few reasons you've pointed out are among the reason why feminism is still relevant, regardless of the silly puff pieces that come out now and then.

Works in America, doesn't it? Like our health system. You know, if Stephen Hawking had to rely on your British system, he'd be dead.

Oh, wait...

Whoa, I'll have to disagree here and emphatically reject that the "bad boy" is a creation of women. A negative reaction to feminism is not necessarily the fault of feminism. The negative reaction to "political correctness" is not necessarily the fault of the simple concept that maybe racial slurs and prejudices are, y'know, bad.

I'm pretty sure that women were treated crap before the sexual revolution and before most women got the simple temerity to think, "Hey, maybe it'd be nice if I could make decisions that actually impacting things!" or "Maybe I really am more than a complicated life-support system for the uterus!"

It's just that back then the reason no woman complained was because more often than not they'd call her hysterical (root, hyster-), and either keep her quiet with paregoric or eyeshadow applied with fists.

Now that there are women who're strong enough to not want to be pushed around, there are reactionary men, reacting to this progress and wanting to rewind it; there are people who are more than willing to be crude in that "ironic" sense because, oh hey, we're all beyond it now! as if it makes it better.

Actually, in a lot of ways, there's a sort of growing quarter-life crisis trend. The youth are told to get into college. Then they get there, **** around for a few years (figuratively, literally), and then are spat out, often with scads of debt, and they stumble around their mid-twenties, trying to figure out where they want to go.

Adolescence is stretching ever longer these days.

Eh, it still happens, to an extent. It's not like the female purity myth has gone away.

I think this is a bit optimistic, to be honest. While there's less shaming going around in most circles, being a manwhore isn't nearly as frowned upon.

But don't smile too much, that's kinda creepy. Like you're psychopathic or something. In fact, don't smile at all. Why are you still smiling? Are you hiding something? Do I have something on my face? Oh, god, I do, don't I? Just... just avert your eyes and keep away, or by the gods, I will stab you with this letter-opener...

...wait...

Ah, did not know that. I kinda only know it as Star Trek: Manhattan.

One hopes that Bletchley Park will still be around. Seems it may be.

*coughs*

What's the line I'm supposed to use? BRB, Bio?

<3

Beer Pong or Flip Cup?

Could be missing something, but Gargoyles?

Rumor has it that Hannah Montana will be taking up the mantle of Dazzler, and be just as effective.

Aww, I actually have that National Geographic poster referenced there. I used to have it on one of my walls, but then I decided it was time to have, y'know. Classy art or something.

I dislike it. Being concise in 160 characters or less doesn't mean you need to shave letters. It just means you need to be parsimonious and brilliant with your words.

On the other hand, I do appreciate clever uses of 1337.