Jan 9, 2010 Cate B updated the link to his or her website.
Jan 9, 2010 Cate B commented on Reading Tonight: The Rich, the Poor, and Jasper Fforde.
I was scrolling past when I caught your reference to "Flatland." I fucking LOVE Flatland. I will check out Shades of Grey.
Nov 29, 2009 Cate B commented on The Morning News: Huskies Win, Honduran Presidential Election, Seattle Marathon, More Sharks.
Thank you for the awesome accompanying art from Exploding Dog.
Nov 24, 2009 Cate B commented on Boy-Nerds Offended by Cootie-Ridden "Girl" Movie.
Thank you. I mean, sure, Twilight is pretty anti-feminist. But the backlash is way, way worse. As near as I can tell from the guys in my life, they are really disgusted to have girly entertainment be so successful. Why??
Jul 18, 2009 Cate B commented on Does Reading Make You Submissive?.
I actually think the author gives up power to their readers. As a reader, you get as close as humanly possible to being inside someone's head. You get the author's entire worldview, their passions, their hangups, what embarrasses them, what titillates them, what shames them.

By putting your work out there as a writer, you are basically giving up your secret inner life to anyone who wants it. That's not domination.
Jul 2, 2009 Cate B commented on I'm Pretty Busy Murdering Arthouse Cinema With My Bare Hands at the Moment....
So YOU'RE the one killing arthouse cinema!

Arthouse cinema: "I have been long seeking you, my nemesis."

Lindy West: *killz*

The rest of us: *actually enjoys the Stranger's film section*
Jun 25, 2009 Cate B commented on Hair: Mammals Have It!.
@27, 30: Seriously! Dude, I do not want your freakin' opinion about my body, even if it's something "positive." (Please withhold your creepy, sexually-tinged approval, thx.)
Jun 22, 2009 Cate B commented on Mormon Vampire Barbie.
@6 Buffy vs. Edward Cullen http://rebelliouspixels.blip.tv/file/226…
Jun 19, 2009 Cate B commented on Our World.
And what a sad world it is.
Jun 12, 2009 Cate B commented on Should Slog De-Friend Barack Obama?.
AR- Okay, please correct me if I'm wrong here, but here's how it rolls: the DOJ files this brief, in which they state that homosexuals are not a suspect class, therefore, the court should use the rational basis test instead of heightened scrutiny to decided if gay people are being denied rights by DOMA. They also say that, under the rational basis test, SoAndSo cases (cases of marriage involving family members not being recognized by other states, etc) show that there is a basis for DOMA being legal as a matter of states' rights.

So are you upset that they're making a legal argument that homosexuals are not a suspect class? In what way is that not a technical legal point? I understand it's an important thing, but I don't see how they could have made their argument without it.

My point is, okay the DOJ is doing something majorly shitty here by filing this brief, but the comparisons that everyone is getting so het up about are really a minor point in this brief. The REAL issue is that the Administration shouldn't have filed this at all. And maybe Obama fucked up by not stopping them from doing so. But people are acting like Obama came swooping down off Marine One holding a giant banner saying "GAYZ R PERVERTS AND CHILD MOLESTERS!!!"