In her reader diary, Julie Hollar writes, The New York Times demonstrates how not to report on reproductive rights groups’ reaction to the Sotomayor nomination: by going to anti-choice activists to frame the story.
revelation of Dowd’s thoughtless use of words is far from new. She’s been
a perennial thorn in the side of feminists and everyone who would like to move beyond Mad Men-era
perceptions of gender.
A new book by Jon A. Shields tries to make reasonable claims about the Christian-right and its "logic," but instead comes off as biased.
A growing number of people in the media seek to dissolve the myth of women’s culpability in violent relationships. But the question that is asked most often of the Rihanna/Chris Brown story is “Why did she stay?” rather than “Why did he do it?”
Cynthia Gorney has a must read piece in the New York Times, entitled "True Lifer"
noting the appeal of Gov. Sarah Palin to voters who want to ban all
As the reality of governing-by-deregulation-talking-points trickles down upon us, is it too much to hope that voters might see through social conservative talking points too?
Yet another major poll demonstrates high levels of consistent support for safe, legal abortion rights, and an election in which social issues are not driving the agenda. Not surprisingly, it’s the economy, proving that most Americans aren’t stupid.
What is The New York Times' problem with abortion? The editorial page consistently supports sex education, birth control, and the right to legally end unwanted pregnancy. The rest of the Times, however, often seems uncomfortable with concrete applications of these principles.
Melinda Henneberger's recent op-ed in The New York Times outlining her thoughts on why the Democrats should be the anti-choice pro-choice party released a blogstorm of protest.