commented on I, Anonymous
You guys excoriating the LW are all jerks. And you're all guys, right? Because you clearly have zero sensitivity to how incredibly loaded any question of diamonds, engagement, and general realationship busy-bodying is when you're female.
The LW obviously knows full well that not-her-mother didn't intend to be an asshole, and that's probably why she didn't confront her directly, and instead resorted to venting on here.
Except not-her-mother WAS being an asshole.
It's a jerk move to 1. Assume that you'll be wearing a diamond if you are engaged, 2. Assume that it's any of your business if another couple gets engaged until they do something like, oh, I dunno, MAKE A FORMAL ENGAGEMENT ANNOUNCEMENT, and 3. Comment in such an insensitive way, where she basically forced the LW into either dishonesty, or divulging personal information she might not want to share.
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Some Ladies Hate Their Labia—And That's Okay—Plus ALL CAPS Oral Rage!
I was with her until "Female genitalia are extremely odd looking in humans and most other animals."
Genitalia are peculiar-looking, certainly, but there is nothing about female genitalia that is objectively weirder or more off-putting than male genitalia, and a suggestion that there is, is -- well, it's misogynist. So now I'm re-evaluating all her other statements as being the result of internalized misogyny rather than an honest relationship with herself and her body.
commented on The Best New Work of Architecture in South Seattle Isn't for the Living but the Storage of Stuff
It might be better than its surroundings, but I am still mightily sick of the design trend toward buildings that are essentially glass boxes, but with vertical bars of contrasting color as a design element.
Also, one of the awful things about the current Seattle development boom is that building all this stuff all at the same time means that twenty years from now we are going to be stuck with a ton of buildings that all reflect what people thought was cool in 2014.
commented on Some Thoughts on Last Night's Election Disaster
@11 I can't believe you're right about something! Cannabis *is* a libertarian value.
Wrong about everything else though, as per usual. I've personally never seen a neighborhood ruined by hipsters or rednecks, or even Amazon employees -- only by the developers who want to extract money from them. Except with rednecks, it's usually a rural area that is ruined. See "Oso mudslide" for reference.
And you libertarian types are big on letting developers do whatever, wherever, whenever, right?
commented on Seattle Is Three Cities: The Young, the Not So Young, and the Definitely Old
I would probably like the Koolhaas library if it were something other than a library, but as it is, it's a library that seems downright hostile toward the paper book, and is filled with hot shrieking colors more appropriate to an acid flashback at a rave than a place where you sit quietly and read things.
Also, the last time I saw an author speak there, I discovered that the parking garage vents into the main hall and had to run from the room coughing and gagging.
@17 I agree with you. I don't want a city that is a monoculture of anything, whether that thing is apodments, single family homes, or high-rise condos.
commented on Well, That Didn't Take Long: Mark Driscoll's Comeback Tour Began Last Night
@41 -- I don't think you're secretly Seattleblues -- you sound sincere to me, so I'm going to tell you sincerely, that my low opinion of the modern evangelical church and the "Christians" one can expect to find there is entirely based on having been raised within the church myself.
People like Driscoll are WHY I left -- it was obvious that the church wanted people like him (anti-feminist, right wing, anti-gay bigots, anti-science) more than it wanted gay-friendly feminist liberals like me. This caused me to think deeply about what I wanted more -- to go to church, largely at that point to please my family, or to sleep in on Sundays. Wow, what a hard choice.
There was a time in my life when I believed sincerely in the message of Jesus, when I first heard it coming from a liberal church concerned with social justice. Later on, though, I still believed that message, but I didn't hear anything like it coming from the new right wing socially conservative church.
I can still respect Christians who are really following the teachings of Jesus, and I know a few of those. But Mark Driscoll and the men he's preaching to here are not those people, and they are, by their own design, the face of modern Christianity.
If you want the people around here to have a higher opinion of Christians, there's only one way to do that: reform the church. Drive out people like Driscoll. Embrace people like "Slacktivist" Fred Clark. Renounce right wing politics. Give up your anti-gay bigotry, your misogyny, your opposition to legal birth control and abortion.
Of course, you won't be able to do it all on your own. But you could start out by recognizing the evil that is in Mark Driscoll and the evil he's brought to the church. And if you're more concerned with tone-policing the people here, than in denouncing Driscoll, then you are part of the problem.
commented on Will a Mayoral Committee Stand Up for Renters?
The problem with "letting developers do whatever the hell they want" (which differs from what we're currently doing how?) is that whatever the hell they want appears to be building an endless supply of high-end high "luxury" apartments in what used to be one-story warehouses and car dealerships in SLU and Capitol Hill.
There is absolutely no reason to think that, left purely to their own free-market devices, developers will ever not attempt to squeeze the maximum possible dollar amount from the highest-income residents. And why should they do anything different? That's what government interference is for -- to correct for situations where the free market cannot possibly meet the needs of the populace.
I don't know of a lot of options, though, because historically it seems like an economic downturn or a crime wave or something like that is the only thing that ever seriously drives down rent. So maybe if Amazon goes belly-up?
Otherwise, better transportation to farther flung areas really is our only option. And voters just shot that down. So.
(Also, I wonder if it would be effective to institute something like a luxury tax on higher-end new development, tied to average income rather than average rental price. The tax could be offset by lower-end developments, and collected funds would go toward improving transportation and other civic amenities in farther-flung areas.)
commented on Women Aren't Letting Men Lead the Conversation About Sexism Anymore
"But I am against modern feminism because it is built on lies. Not just the ones I listed but also the weird blank-slatism that denies any innate differences between men and women. "
You didn't list any feminist lies. Where did you list feminist lies? I see only "feminist straw man." And of course you're doing it again. Feminism doesn't deny "innate" differences between men and women -- in fact, one of the goals of feminism is to correct the ways that our culture, by assuming "male" as the default human being, has slighted women in areas like, for example, health care research.
The problem with patriarchal culture (which is what feminism opposes) is that it lies about what those differences are, then uses that against women. ("Women can't do math.") But patriarchal culture tries to shove everybody, male and female, into a pre-existing hole of binary gender compliance, and it's frequently a bad fit.
"Let's take slut-shaming as an example. Modern gender feminism imagines that slut-shaming is something men do to women to keep them down"
Not true. Slut-shaming is something that *patriarchal culture* does to women, and women are frequently the ones perpetuating patriarchal culture. Feminists know this.
"men are subjected to their own version: virgin-shaming, i.e. being called a loser who can't get a girlfriend, a basement-dwelling neck-bearded virgin, etc. "
Three things: women get virgin-shamed too (actually for women it's more like prude-shaming), feminism is not interested in virgin-shaming anybody, and don't try to tell me that virgin-shaming against men is anywhere near as pervasive and damaging as slut-shaming against women. Virgin-shaming is never used to "disappear" sexual assault as a crime. Rush Limbaugh has never launched a "virgin-shaming" campaign against men for using hormonal contraception. Men who are virgins don't have their basic right to bodily autonomy threatened every day by any organized equivalent to the anti-abortion movement.
You've fallen into a very common trap for anti-feminist dudes: thinking something that threatens your masculine ego even a tiny little bit is totally as bad as something that threatens women's bodily autonomy, physical safety, basic civil liberties, etc.
"The fact is, it is *hard* as a heterosexual man to sleep with a lot of women. It's an achievement. "
Dude, feminism really doesn't care about your sex life. And your theory is not well-considered at all. If we respected people because they did something difficult, we'd respect single mothers. There is literally nothing men do, related to sex, that is as difficult as pregnancy, childbirth, and nursing.
commented on Women Aren't Letting Men Lead the Conversation About Sexism Anymore
@13 Have you considered that maybe you feel no shame because you're a sociopath? Did you feel shame the last time you kicked a puppy?
@21 You weren't afraid to say that. So stop whining.
@23 People feel the need to keep explaining feminism to anti-feminists, because most anti-feminists are clearly against some imaginary straw feminism that exists only in their heads.
Why are *you* against feminism anyway? Because you think it's over, there's nothing to be done, women are completely equal to men in every way? There's no wage gap, no street harassment, no rape culture, no slut-shaming, no anti-abortion/anti-contraception movement, equal representation in congress, etc. so forth? Or is it because you think that if a problem affects mostly women, it's not an important problem. so why are we talking about it?
@26 But he didn't lump all white men into a group of shrill whiners. Just the ones who whine shrilly. Feeling attacked?