Slashdot Mirror

This article was published by Fox news journalist. The numbers may be wrong but this is alarming thing. http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/con tent.php?content.185 If we ban all porn, we will have tens of millions cases - major industry and employer.

It's far worse than that. I'd love to repost the information here but it's more efficient to just provide links on America's Debtor Prisons, on The Failing Court System regarding Welfare and Child support. That should get you started.

There's some sanity in the world:
http://www.ifeminists.net/index.php

Lol. I didn't even notice WorldNetDaily was a bunch of crackpots until just now that you pointed it out and I took a second look. I actually found their link through another site that I do regularly read, iFeminists.net. (Yes, I was the one who posted the original Slashdot report.)

They did accurately report the results of the peer-reviewed study, even though the got the name of the journal incorrect in their article (which I did correct in my post). Considering that, I thought it was a great piece of important research that I hadn't read anywhere else. I don't particularly care that the right-wing is using this as propaganda, but I still think that the research is important to highlight.

The fact that they don't include the title, author, or volume for the journal article isn't particularly damning. None of the regular news articles from general news sites ever has this level of detail. The fact that they reported the actual journal name is a step up from most news sites. You could have found the correct article from that alone had you tried, like several of the other posters.

The damning part, as you pointed out, is the fact that they only talk to the Discovery Institute. Most news sites wouldn't even think of talking to these people since they had nothing to do with the actual discovery. Places like Fox News might call them up, but only to obtain a false sense of "balance" in order to be "fair", as if it actually matters what a bunch of non-scientists think regarding science reporting.

That's a "trusted" source, I guess.

But JawaOnline uses "hate speech", according to Google News.

Go ahead, mod this down. But Google News accepts as "news" a site that all but cheers on misogynistic honor rape.

The original McElroy article (which itself has some interesting onward links) makes it clear that she does not view herself as one of these elitist women; it concludes:

"I still squirm at the thought of how many successful women now seem to view a large percentage of decent single men. Namely, as lesser and lower."

The Spectator may think that "females of whatever species are hot-wired to find the best possible mate" but McElroy clearly disagrees, at least if you reduce the best to a simplistic, status based analysis. It is a clever trick in the article, which makes it look as if that is what she was saying, when the journalist knows it was the opposite.

Any Slashdotters who are pondering attending this university should think carefully about whether they are willing to accept the complete lack of wireless and consistent 15-25% packet loss on the dormitory connections.