I dunno man. I'm not disagreeing with you because you didn't really talk about the article at all, but I thought the article has potential as a a good jumping off point for important discussions.

Start with this comment and work your way down. Work your way down allllll the way to the bottom:

Here's the fundamental problem with Orenstein and her ilk:

"It is a brilliant story—fake and fraud that it is. It would be absurd for me or any other editor to review the authenticity or accuracy of stories that are nominated for prizes."

You weren't allowed to go outside as a kid, while I was allowed to drive a thousand miles to Dallas within a year of having my driver's license. The difference between my upbringing and yours was that by the time Jon Walsh was convincing the world that "stranger danger" was the status quo, my friends and I were already sneaking alcohol out of the liquor cabinet.

Narratives matter. The intent of narratives matter. And the goal of Orenstein and those who worship Orenstein is not to solve a problem, not to investigate solutions, not to work out coping strategies, but to find a scapegoat. here she is:

The thing is, nobody’s talking to the boys in their lives. Their parents aren’t talking to them. Most schools aren’t doing any kind of sex education — and if they are, it’s just about risk and danger, contraception and STDs.

Thing is though they never fucking have. Sex ed in the United States has always been a rude cartoon of a sketch of a wear a condom just say no slogan. I'm old enough to be your dad and when I read the kids books of my parents it was the exact same fuckin' situation. Go read Tiger Eyes by Judy Blume and know that's teen angst as experienced forty fuckin' years ago. So what's different? We've been puzzling this shit out since 1890. And I mean it doesn't have to be in her wheelhouse? But if what gives you the in is an op-ed piece, tie it to facts. Skenazy did.

But you don't know any of this, because what you have is a Vox article that, because you don't know anything around it, you think is "a good jumping off point." Not your fault - let's be clear. My beef isn't with you, it's with Orenstein, those who think like Orenstein, and those who think people like Orenstein should be given full credulous voice.

'cuz that's what killed the Equal Rights Amendment.