@so what? I thought about doing that. I probably should have. I thought being so far from everything/one and dependent on the bus would be a problem, but I'm a hermit anyway, so I doubt it would have mattered. And it might have forced me to stay in my office most days and get more work done!
@j-i-a That wasn't me, sadly!
This is great. I relate to it a whole lot. Marriage I get, at least as a means to an end, especially in the US. Weddings, not so much.
But my question is this: reasonable rent?? I happen to live in the same Midwestern college town, and for a comparable rent I could live in very, very close proximity to Manhattan. I think the rental market here is baffling and ridiculous. But I guess cohabiting would ease the burden a lot.
Aha! That part about the "lower dose of hormones" makes so much sense to me. The doctor told me it should NOT cause the crippling depression side effects that the pills caused, because the dose was lower. But it was just as bad, if not worse. I have a Mirena now, and it has been fine. Much, much lower dose maybe? (Eta: Oh yes, I see the commenter above has said that.)
Wow, this is giving me flashbacks to my dissertation chair's comments: "First half of short sentence that introduces concept (EXPLAIN THIS!), and second half that explains concept. (OK!)" Read the whole sentence before commenting, argh!
@Beaks I agree. The problem is the ambiguity. "Everyone" knows it means bad, scary, artificial things, which are the opposite of "natural" things, but which things are those? If I like vitamins, are added vitamins chemicals or not? What if I didn't want them added to my food, even though they have nutritional value? What about "natural" coloring? Is it always a bad chemical, or is it sometimes okay? Etc. Everyone knows what she means, but everyone draws the line somewhere different. Since she is supposed to giving us expert advice about what is healthy and what isn't, I'd expect something less ambiguous.
@muralgirl I meant mega-healthy. Oops. Missed the edit window.
@crocuta Yes. That means nothing. Cheetos are a bunch of chemicals mixed together with other chemicals on top of them. So is organic vegan paleo meg-healthy soup.
On "At what other moment in history would it have been plausible for a serial killer to identify middle-aged white men as his most vulnerable targets?"
@Megasus I agree. And not even just then. There have always been disgruntled, poor (white) men. And this mythical age when families were all stable and eternal never existed.
I think the show is worth criticizing for its classism (and materialism to a lesser extent - that's often code for criticizing its femininity). But this article is great, and I agree that one of the most valuable things about the show is that it has relatable female characters who are not designed to be attractive to male viewers. Well, straight male viewers. That should be specified. How many other TV shows are like that? Also, I think it does a good job of showing female relationships in a deep and sometimes uncomfortable/painful way. It also has some of the most believable dialogue out there. So while it has flaws (basically almost anything that made it into the movies), I think the author here makes a good point about it not deserving the mockery its has collected.