mary / vancouver, canada / communications professional / political junkie / research interests include partisanship, political polarization, new media, public opinion, discourses on feminism and race
Probably the best rant I’ve read on the Internet today, check out politicalprof’s post on why representing both sides of the issue is sometimes an absurd demand.
My favourite (infuriating) example of this is when people insist that both sides be presented so a neutral observer can presumably make up their mind more successfully after weighing both arguments, even when one is completely spurious, such as the evolution vs. intelligent design teachings in some American science textbooks. Not to mention that one’s ability to formulate an opinion about any given issue isn’t an indicator of accuracy of either side of any argument.
While the long-term economic feasibility of such a law remains to be seen, placing a tangible monetary value on unpaid work traditionally done by women, e.g. being a full-time stay-at-home parent, is a good way of recognizing that such tasks should not be viewed as less important or lower-status. It’ll be interesting to see if and how this law extends to stay-at-home fathers or alternative parenting models.
Given recent allegations that 3 military service members — all who are in charge of sexual assault programs — committed sexual assaults, Fox News has seriously underreported the topic. While MSNBC spent nearly 5 hours on it in the last 2 weeks, Fox News spent less than 19 minutes.
Study cited above here. Legal choice does not mean real choice.