Oh fantastic! One article out of literally hundreds. Thank you so much for single handedly solving the lack of diversity on this website. I will get your gold star to you in the mail.
This entire article is OBVIOUS internet flaming, and to try and disguise it as “encouraging different viewpoints” is a slap in the face to other websites who genuinely do make an effort to represent an array of women. TSM caters to an audience, and the general consensus is that this audience neither agreed with nor enjoyed this piece – and it’s bad PR, and frankly childish, to continue to fight with your readers on this instead of accepting the fact that this article was (for good reason) not well-received.
“We represent a broad spectrum of women.” Oh, really? So when can we expect to see articles written by a Democratic woman, or a lesbian, or a woman of a different ethnicity besides white? TSM has every right to post asinine articles like these, but please don’t insult your readers’ intelligence by claiming that this anything other than an attempt to create an internet shit-storm and gain the temporarily increased viewership that follows it.
Democratic women also work, pay taxes, and uphold their constitutional rights, as far as I’m aware. None of these things are characteristically conservative.
While I agree that stances on social issues like marriage equality and women’s rights are becoming more of a generational difference rather than Republican vs. Democrat (many of my Republican friends support gay marriage, are pro-choice, etc.), the fact of the matter is that our generation is not (yet) in public office. Many young Republicans may support equality, feminism, etc., but the 45+ year old Republicans that hold office TODAY, voting on bills and public policy TODAY, do not. So, if you truly find yourself in line with these ideals, it would be best to vote for officials that reflect that – which, for the present time being, are Democrats.
Because kids are expensive. You’re in the mind set that tax breaks given to married couples with kids is a kind of “reward” from the government for procreating, it’s not. If it was, then straight married couples without kids wouldn’t receive any tax benefits. Tax breaks are given to married couples to offset the natural expenses that come with sharing a life together, such as mortgages, car payments, etc. SCOTUS recognized today that it wasn’t fair for gay marriages to not receive these benefits because they too face these same expenses as straight couples, and should therefore receive the same tax breaks. Having children or not isn’t even a factor in all of this except that you mentioned married couples with kids receive larger benefits, and that is because of the simple fact that kids are an added expense. A gay couple who adopts will now receive the same benefits as a straight couple who has their own kids, thus voiding the argument that marriage, as a government institution, is based on the need to continue the population.
Can’t provide a counter argument to an argument that was completely invalid in the first place there champ. But keep building nonsensical theories in your head and then telling yourself how awesome you are if that’s what gets you through.
wow, actually felt myself losing brain cells reading ice cold/TrickleDown’s arguments on this one. “Marriage was a subsidy and institution based on having children.” Mmmm, nice try, but no. You’re aware that pregnancy can (and does…often) occur without marriage, correct? Thought so. As for hotpiece’s argument being ‘destroyed,’ it wasn’t actually hotpiece’s argument to begin with, she was simply reiterating the very logic that SCOTUS followed to reach their verdict. But thanks for playing, and for sharing your baseless opinions on an issue that has been decided and is therefore dead in the water.
TrickleDown is unfortunately under the impression that by repeating something, it becomes true. It doesn’t. 1) No, marriage is not a subsidy. Please see the definition of “subsidy.” 2) No, slippery slope arguments don’t work, that’s why they’re called logical FALLACIES. Please see definition of “fallacy.” 3) The infidelity argument is completely, utterly, irrelevant because then you would be suggesting that simply because people might cheat, they should be denied the right to marry. And if that were true, where does that leave our red blooded American male population? Royally screwed, that’s where.
my boyfriend always tips more than 15% if we get good service because he actually has money, because he can, and because everyone knows you’re more respected when you leave a good tip. “Don’t go around making life better for the poor?” You sound like someone who wears Juicy track suits and carries an ugly chihuahua in your knockoff Louis V.
thank GOD someone finally said it. Lilly makes some fabulous dresses, but she also makes heinous ones. Just because it says Lilly on the label does not mean you can skip checking in the mirror to see if it makes you look like a dowdy grandmother on her way to Hawaii. also, stop wearing 8 “Yurman” bracelets at a time. We know they’re fake.
The Great and Terrible Beauty series- FABULOUS! Dark and mysterious, anyone who likes a little magic/supernatural element to their stories will love these.
Little Bee- SO incredibly sad, but also a beautiful story. A great read, but not for anyone looking for a good pick-me-up.
Gods in Alabama- awesome book! Great for anyone raised in a small town in the South will relate perfectly.
Hunger Games- haven’t read it yet, but literally every person I have talked to has loved it. The next read on my list.
For all the F. Scott Fitzgerald fans out there, Kate Chopin is what I would consider the female version of him. My personal favorite, “The Awakening.” Old-time literature with a modern theme that any woman worth her wits would love.
Also, for anyone who has ever read “The Giver”, there is a second book (not a sequel, but definitely goes along with the same futuristic theme) called “Gathering Blue.” If you liked The Giver, it is a guarantee you will love this one as well.
For an easy pool read, grab The Clique. I can’t remember the author, but its a short, fun book for a day by the beach, etc.
Oh fantastic! One article out of literally hundreds. Thank you so much for single handedly solving the lack of diversity on this website. I will get your gold star to you in the mail.
This entire article is OBVIOUS internet flaming, and to try and disguise it as “encouraging different viewpoints” is a slap in the face to other websites who genuinely do make an effort to represent an array of women. TSM caters to an audience, and the general consensus is that this audience neither agreed with nor enjoyed this piece – and it’s bad PR, and frankly childish, to continue to fight with your readers on this instead of accepting the fact that this article was (for good reason) not well-received.
“We represent a broad spectrum of women.” Oh, really? So when can we expect to see articles written by a Democratic woman, or a lesbian, or a woman of a different ethnicity besides white? TSM has every right to post asinine articles like these, but please don’t insult your readers’ intelligence by claiming that this anything other than an attempt to create an internet shit-storm and gain the temporarily increased viewership that follows it.
“We’ll stay right where we are: under your boyfriend”
Yep, that’s exactly right. Because you’re nothing more than a hole, and he sure as hell isn’t going to be seen out in public with you.
Democratic women also work, pay taxes, and uphold their constitutional rights, as far as I’m aware. None of these things are characteristically conservative.
While I agree that stances on social issues like marriage equality and women’s rights are becoming more of a generational difference rather than Republican vs. Democrat (many of my Republican friends support gay marriage, are pro-choice, etc.), the fact of the matter is that our generation is not (yet) in public office. Many young Republicans may support equality, feminism, etc., but the 45+ year old Republicans that hold office TODAY, voting on bills and public policy TODAY, do not. So, if you truly find yourself in line with these ideals, it would be best to vote for officials that reflect that – which, for the present time being, are Democrats.
Because kids are expensive. You’re in the mind set that tax breaks given to married couples with kids is a kind of “reward” from the government for procreating, it’s not. If it was, then straight married couples without kids wouldn’t receive any tax benefits. Tax breaks are given to married couples to offset the natural expenses that come with sharing a life together, such as mortgages, car payments, etc. SCOTUS recognized today that it wasn’t fair for gay marriages to not receive these benefits because they too face these same expenses as straight couples, and should therefore receive the same tax breaks. Having children or not isn’t even a factor in all of this except that you mentioned married couples with kids receive larger benefits, and that is because of the simple fact that kids are an added expense. A gay couple who adopts will now receive the same benefits as a straight couple who has their own kids, thus voiding the argument that marriage, as a government institution, is based on the need to continue the population.
Also, governments.*
Can’t provide a counter argument to an argument that was completely invalid in the first place there champ. But keep building nonsensical theories in your head and then telling yourself how awesome you are if that’s what gets you through.
wow, actually felt myself losing brain cells reading ice cold/TrickleDown’s arguments on this one. “Marriage was a subsidy and institution based on having children.” Mmmm, nice try, but no. You’re aware that pregnancy can (and does…often) occur without marriage, correct? Thought so. As for hotpiece’s argument being ‘destroyed,’ it wasn’t actually hotpiece’s argument to begin with, she was simply reiterating the very logic that SCOTUS followed to reach their verdict. But thanks for playing, and for sharing your baseless opinions on an issue that has been decided and is therefore dead in the water.
TrickleDown is unfortunately under the impression that by repeating something, it becomes true. It doesn’t. 1) No, marriage is not a subsidy. Please see the definition of “subsidy.” 2) No, slippery slope arguments don’t work, that’s why they’re called logical FALLACIES. Please see definition of “fallacy.” 3) The infidelity argument is completely, utterly, irrelevant because then you would be suggesting that simply because people might cheat, they should be denied the right to marry. And if that were true, where does that leave our red blooded American male population? Royally screwed, that’s where.
sometimes I think I might take fashion advice from someone who wears Ugg boots, but then I think ehh.. better not.
my boyfriend always tips more than 15% if we get good service because he actually has money, because he can, and because everyone knows you’re more respected when you leave a good tip. “Don’t go around making life better for the poor?” You sound like someone who wears Juicy track suits and carries an ugly chihuahua in your knockoff Louis V.
EXTREMELY bitter. who is this article written for, the Forever Alone Sad Girl’s Society? go out and go on an actual date, girl.
both of the ADPi comments sounded in my head like a hysterical Gretchen Weiners.
thank GOD someone finally said it. Lilly makes some fabulous dresses, but she also makes heinous ones. Just because it says Lilly on the label does not mean you can skip checking in the mirror to see if it makes you look like a dowdy grandmother on her way to Hawaii. also, stop wearing 8 “Yurman” bracelets at a time. We know they’re fake.
this is severe case of trying too hard. please just stop.
if you have to flat out tell the guy you will have sex with him to get him to say yes, you must really suck. I don’t see how no one else noticed this.
Alpha Love sister!
^ honey, that’s obviously the leg of the FOURTH girl on the end…nice try though.
Just to add to what I’ve seen thus far-
The Great and Terrible Beauty series- FABULOUS! Dark and mysterious, anyone who likes a little magic/supernatural element to their stories will love these.
Little Bee- SO incredibly sad, but also a beautiful story. A great read, but not for anyone looking for a good pick-me-up.
Gods in Alabama- awesome book! Great for anyone raised in a small town in the South will relate perfectly.
Hunger Games- haven’t read it yet, but literally every person I have talked to has loved it. The next read on my list.
For all the F. Scott Fitzgerald fans out there, Kate Chopin is what I would consider the female version of him. My personal favorite, “The Awakening.” Old-time literature with a modern theme that any woman worth her wits would love.
Also, for anyone who has ever read “The Giver”, there is a second book (not a sequel, but definitely goes along with the same futuristic theme) called “Gathering Blue.” If you liked The Giver, it is a guarantee you will love this one as well.
For an easy pool read, grab The Clique. I can’t remember the author, but its a short, fun book for a day by the beach, etc.