Got a few things to share with y’all.

Like this : Guess what city in the USA has the highest number of same-sex couples raising kids?

New York City? San Francisco? Some gay commune in the Florida keys?

Nope, it’s Salt Lake City, Utah.

Turns out, when you raise people with family values, they raise families.

As counterintuitive as this factoid may be, it makes sense when you think about how same-sex couples raising kids tends to happen.

Usually, it is after one part of a heterosexual couple with kids comes out of the closet, they get a divorce, and the homosexual person ends up with custody. They meet someone new, and bam, Heather Has Two Mommies, or Daddies.

After all, lots of place still ban gay adoption, so that’s not going to happen much. And without that, gay men have no avenue to get children. (That’s why so many of us spoil our pets.) So that eliminates half the homosexual population right there.

That leaves lesbians, and while they have the option of opting for artificial insemination, I can’t see that happening nearly as much as the divorce scenario.

But why Salt Lake City? I think it’s precisely because it’s the sort of place most gay and lesbian people would flee for a bigger urban center which will be more understanding.

Young homosexual people will take that option in droves. But people old enough to have kids already are going to have lives, jobs, mortgages, friends, and most importantly, the kids themselves.

In other words, they have roots, and can’t just pack up and go. So they stay.

All the young, unattached homosexuals end up in the big cities, and the older ones stay where they are and make do, and so the percentage of gays and lesbians raising children goes up.

Next up, we have some rich people being extremely silly.

I mean, very very very silly. I particularly like the completely deadpan way Olivia Wilde said “I only got in because I’m an android from the future. ” That made me LOL big time.

And yeah, Sir Richard Bransen can’t act. It doesn’t matter. He is such a megastar of awesomeness that he can get away with not being a super good actor.

I mean, nobody gives a shit if Einstein could golf.

And obviously, talking about not going to the bathroom is just their way of mixing in potty humour with a very simple and important message about water. It is physically impossible to keep from going to the bathroom for very long.

Eventually, it just happens.

Of course, if you take the phrase “going to the bathroom” very literally, you certainly can avoid going to the bathroom. It’s easy to avoid entering a specific room. No problem.

You will still urinate and defecate, just… somewhere else.

The best spin I can put on that is rich people squatting behind bushes somewhere. Or wearing adult diapers. Or some kind of horrifying “Rudy will await your foundation” kind of scenario.

Next up, we have a very delightful and fun to read subreddit called Shit Cosmo Says.

On it, people lambaste and ridicule all the crazy garbage that lurks inside the pages of Cosmo magazine, especially the really mindlessly sexist and patronizing “advice” to women.

It was a real eye-opener for me as a kid when I suddenly realized that women’s magazines were incredibly sexist. They reinforced this idea that women are vapid, vacuous, silly creatures who only care about fashion and makeup and how best to please a man. Nowhere do they give women credit for having brains, ambition, concerns, and a life completely independent from men and what attracts and pleases them.

And for a few years, I just kept this thought to myself. I mean, surely I was wrong. I couldn’t imagine that millions of women bought these things and eagerly devoured the degradation like it was chocolate. There must be something I am not getting.

And then, I read an article that said that most women’s magazines are in fact written entirely by men, and suddenly it all made sense.

This was the patriarchy feeding women a version of themselves that was acceptable to the patriarchy. Men were very unlikely to write things that would challenge or confuse women. Instead, they get empty intellectual calories designed to make them feel they need to constantly be focused on their appearance or they will die alone.

I am sure that this is not consciously in the minds of the men writing and editing these rags, but it is still there. It is the same sort of thing that makes shows like The View and (forgive me!) Ellen make my skin crawl and my soul scream.

I am very lucky to have a mother who was quite liberated before it was even cool. My mother went to college to learn, not just to bide time and hunt husbands. She took courses where she was the only woman there and endured a lot of sexist abuse from the male professors thereof. She worked for all of my childhood, with an income equal to my father’s. She is an intelligent, inquisitive, deeply intellectual woman, and is therefore nothing like the women such magazines are aimed at.

And that is probably why they horrify and enrage me. My mother isn’t like that. Neither of my sisters are like that. Any time I have met any woman like that, I have found it profoundly irritating, to the point of taking me dangerously close to displaying my contempt to them.

And I am a very polite and sensitive fellow, so that is something I simply Do Not Do.

So my point (and I do have one) is that I hate women’s magazines and their ilk, and so I am happy to see a home for ruthlessly mocking their sexist horribleness.

Oh, and finally, the bondage. Normally I download pictures and rehost them, but this is furry art, and I feel like that would be stealing from the artist.

So I will just (Warning : NSFW, boobs)link to it.

Now, bondage does nothing for me and females do almost nothing for me, but I felt like sharing that image because I find her facial expression absolutely enchanting.

Sweet, naughty, inviting, shy… it’s all in there. She is just plain adorable. It makes me want to give her a big hug.

Although presumably, that’s not what she has in mind.

But she’s so darn cute!