My Zen Arcade

there’s bunches more but I’m laughing too hard!!!

LOLVogue: Starving Models & Marionettes

I don’t know whats more surprising.  What ‘Dr.’ Laura says, or the fact that people are still interviewing her.
Probably the latter (I’d just assumed she’d died…)

Think Progress » Dr. Laura stands by her man comments.

COLMES: Isn’t it the jerk who cheats on his wife? Doesn’t the responsibility lie with that adulterer and that man who makes that decision?SCHLESSINGER: His responsibility for cheating is his. The responsibility for mistreating her man is hers.

COLMES: And just because a man cheats does not mean he was mistreated. He could just be a horny guy who…

HANNITY: Oh!

COLMES: Jeez, you never heard that word before?

SCHLESSINGER: And I said, if he’s narcissistic, sociopathic, then all bets are off.

COLMES: Right.

SCHLESSINGER: That he’s a jerk.

COLMES: And aren’t most men who cheat on their wives — fall in that category?

SCHLESSINGER: No.

COLMES: They’re narcissistic?

SCHLESSINGER: No.

COLMES: They’re not respecting their wives.

SCHLESSINGER: No, the wives haven’t been respecting them.

Only sluts and whores will get HPV.
(like those pesky Negro girls, who we all know are sluts and whores)
(and, apparently, 1 in 5 non-Negroes who are also obviously sluts and whores or who have horrible parents who don’t raise them as good christians)

CDC study says at least 1 in 4 teen girls has a sexually transmitted disease; HPV most common | NewsOK.com

At least one in four teenage girls nationwide has a sexually transmitted disease, or more than 3 million teens, according to the first study of its kind in this age group.A virus that causes cervical cancer is by far the most common sexually transmitted infection in teen girls aged 14 to 19, while the highest overall prevalence is among black girls — nearly half the blacks studied had at least one STD. That rate compared with 20 percent among both whites and Mexican-American teens, the study from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found.

Well, thats got to be very comforting to women. Wear jeans and you can’t possibly be raped.
(quite possibly the most horrible thing to come out of Italy since…)

(edit: sorry, this is actually from 9 years ago, dunno why its making the rounds now.  However, the fact that it was 9 years ago doesn’t diminish how  fucking repulsive this is)

BBC News | Europe | Women in jeans ‘cannot be raped’

Women in jeans ‘cannot be raped’Women in jeans ‘cannot be raped’
Italy’s highest court has ruled that a woman wearing jeans cannot be raped.

The Supreme Court of Appeal in Rome on Wednesday overturned a rape conviction, saying that the supposed victim must have agreed to sex because her jeans could not have been removed without her consent.

A court in the southern town of Potenza had convicted a driving instructor of raping his 18-year-old pupil.

The instructor, aged 45 and identified only as Carmine, had been sentenced to 34 months’ jail.

His defence had argued that the young woman - identified as Rosa - had consented to sex, a version of events which the woman strongly denied.

The Supreme Court ruled that it was impossible to remove a pair of jeans “without the collaboration of the person wearing them”, and that the young woman must therefore have consented to sex.

In a judgement likely to anger women’s rights organisations, the rape conviction was reversed.

Driving instructors in Italy have a reputation, deserved or undeserved, for molesting young female pupils, and the case appeared at first to be a familiar story of sexual assault on a lonely country road.

Well, I hate it when I agree with Ms. Malkin, but I ended up at the following link from her site.
While I think it is probably a good idea to shift the narrow focus of how science programs and research are handled, the idea that, because the nature of the beast isn’t pleasant to many women (”where winning is everything, and women find it repulsive”) is, well, just plain old tough titties.  I find the nature of working a job, being rated based on accomplishing tasks and how hard I work, to be VERY unpleasant.  I wanted to go to law school, but memorizing everything was really annoying.
My point is that there probably is a great deal to be gained by shifting how science/research/engineering programs (both academic and professional) are structured, but the fact that many women don’t like how it works now is hardly a justifiable reason.  Title IX should prevent women from being actively discriminated against, should ensure that women have equal access to such positions and programs, should ensure that women are not arbitrarily ignored based on their gender.  But it should not be used to change how research is run just so women are happier with it.
Thats a change that has to come because it HELPS science, not just to make it prettier.

Why Can’t a Woman Be More Like a Man? — The American, A Magazine of Ideas

There is another essential difference between sports and science: in science, men and women play on the same teams. Very few women can compete on equal terms with men in lacrosse, wrestling, or basketball; by contrast, there are many brilliant women in the top ranks of every field of science and technology, and no one doubts their ability to compete on equal terms. Yet a centerpiece of STEM activism is the idea that science, as currently organized and practiced, is intrinsically hostile to women and a barrier to the realization of their unique intellectual potential. MIT biologist Nancy Hopkins, an effective leader of the science equity campaign (and a prominent accuser of Harvard president Lawrence Summers when he committed the solecism of suggesting that men and women might have different propensities and aptitudes), points to the hidden sexism of the obsessive and competitive work ethic of institutions like MIT.“It is a system,” Hopkins says, “where winning is everything, and women find it repulsive.” This viewpoint explains the constant emphasis, by equity activists such as Shalala, Rolison, and Olsen, on the need to transform the “entire culture” of academic science and engineering. Indeed, the charter for the October 17 congressional hearing placed primary emphasis on academic culture: “The list of cultural norms that appear to disadvantage women…includes the favoring of disciplinary over interdisciplinary research and publications, and the only token attention given to teaching and other service during the tenure review process. Thus it seems that it is not necessarily conscious bias against women but an ingrained idea of how the academic enterprise ‘should be’ that presents the greatest challenge to women seeking academic S&E [science and engineering] careers.”