ChaseDream
搜索
查看: 440|回复: 2

[阅读小分队] 【Native Speaker每日训练计划】No.2841 文史哲

[复制链接]
发表于 2020-7-19 23:47:22 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
内容:Smiling Sima 编辑:Sirrena Lai

Wechat ID: NativeStudy  / Weibo: http://weibo.com/u/3476904471



Part I: Speaker


News Brief: COVID-19 Cases Surge, CDC's Black Employees, Breonna Taylor Case
July 16, 20205:11 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition



[Rephrase: 11:01]

Source: NPR
https://www.npr.org/2020/07/16/877778763/morning-news-brief


Part II: Speed




Every Terrible Article Someone Wrote on The Bold Type
A comprehensive guide.

By HANNAH KLEIN and HEATHER SCHWEDEL
JUNE 16, 2020

[Time 2]
Maybe it’s the social isolation. Maybe it’s that we’ve started to run out of new TV. Maybe we’ve all been secretly watching the whole time. (Guilty!) Whatever the case, The Bold Type—a Freeform show, now in its fourth season, set at a Cosmo-like women’s magazine—has gained steam as something of a buzzy quarantine watch. HuffPost is opining on it; so is Vogue. We welcome the discourse! But another way of enjoying The Bold Type—one especially beloved among journalists and writers—is snarking about how unrealistic it is. It’s become a media Twitter parlor game to poke fun at what a bad journalist the show’s main character, Jane, is, even if sometimes you’re also privately wincing with recognition and self-loathing. The show provides ample material to work with in this respect, often in the form of occasional pans over Jane or someone else’s work on screen. Not since Carrie Bradshaw couldn’t help but wonder have we been so captivated by a blinking cursor. In fact, it’s kind of impossible to get a look at any piece of writing The Bold Type shows and resist the temptation to rip it apart.
Just in time for the show’s season finale on Thursday (alas, plans for a longer season were dashed by the coronavirus crisis), here is nothing more or less than a collection of screenshots of every single draft or published piece of writing that has appeared on The Bold Type. Whatever, you know you wanted to read them! Consider it a gift, from our dot-com to yours.
[258 words]

[Time 3]
Season 1, Episode 2:

“O Hell No! Never Had An Orgasm? Me Neither. What It’s Like When The Big O is The Big No.” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet

With my best friend’s fingers twisting frantically inside of my vagina as she (very bravely) helped me dislodge a rogue yoni egg, I realized how much pain women go through on our unique pursuits of pleasure.

So why the egg? And why oh why did my friend have to play back-alley-obstetrician? I was trying something new in yet another failed attempt to experience something that would be

Our first ever glimpse of Jane’s writing for Scarlet magazine. Seems like there might have been other ways to learn about women’s pain, but OK.
Season 1, Episode 3:

“Why Girls Sometimes Fake It And Do We Even Care?” by Ryan Decker for Pinstripe

If you ask a hundred women why they fake their orgasm on occasion, and you’ll likely get a hundred different answers. But, this isn’t an encyclopedic look at why women don’t climax. This isn’t a treatise on locating the clitoris. And this definitely isn’t an essay about giving your girl an Earth-shattering O. Don’t worry; you don’t have to look too far into Pinstripe’s back catalog to find such pieces authored by yours truly.

This is an article about reality: no matter how hard you try, no matter how good you are in bed, sometimes, she’s not going to orgasm. Sometimes, she’s going to fake it. And that’s okay. Look, we at Pinstripe aren’t just here to help you pick out the best cardigans. We also want to turn you into sex gods (or at least someone who is good at sex). And that means caring why your partner might sometimes fake it.

Biologically speaking, getting a man to orgasm is about as easy as eating a sandwich, and can be achieved with far less effort. Getting a woman to orgasm can be more difficult than walking, chewing gum, dribbling a basketball, and reciting a sonnet at the same time. For women, achieving and orgasm is about a confluence of things coming together––literally and figuratively––in a perfect storm, from the shape of your penis to
[367 words]

[Time 4]
Another first: first Pinstripe byline! As an example of an annoying male magazine writer’s take on “faking it,” this works. Since we get to see both the draft and the published piece, we were hoping Ryan would cut the sentence that goes, “Biologically speaking, getting a man to orgasm is about as easy as eating a sandwich, and can be achieved with far less effort.” No such luck.
Season 1, Episode 5:

“My Night With the Feminist Stripper” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet [read aloud by Jane]

Strong, sensual, powerful. These are the adjectives describing the Wall Street banker in front of me. But as I continue watching, another adjective buries them all: free.

This lede is only slightly better than beginning your article with, “The dictionary defines blank as …”
Season 1, Episode 7:

“Trusting Your Love Life To The Ones Who Love You” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet

With heavy legs and the lowest of expectations, I walked into the dimly lit restaurant in search of the man with a peg leg or the woman with the beard. I scanned and saw nothing until I saw him staring directly and intently at me. This had to be him but also, how could it possibly be him?

Close your eyes and think about the absolute worst things you have done to your best friends: the time you vomited on their favourite outfit, the time you embarrassed them in front of their crush and let’s not forget all the times they’ve had to drop everything to save your butt. True, our best friends are saints but even the disciples couldn’t hold it all-the-way-together for one dinner.

With that in mind, close your eyes again and think about handing over your phone to that same best friend to setup a blind date for you with any person of their choice. Hence why I was completely surprised that my friends took the keys to my heart and didn’t steer it into a swamp (just for the hilarious story of course) but instead, into the company of the kind of good man I would have never noticed yet constantly complain I can’t find.

This is the premise behind SetMeUp, a new app with a blind
[372 words]

[Time 5]
Season 1, Episode 9:

“Feminism Cannot Exist Without Intersectionality” by Lauren Bridges for Incite

As our society grows increasingly diverse, how can we ensure inclusivity in the feminist movement? The answer is intersectional feminism. When a black woman is discriminated against, she does not know which identity is at fault: her blackness or her womanhood. She is at an intersection of two potential explanations for the discrimination. Intersectional feminism captures this idea that gender is not a single category: women have different identities based on race, sexuality, class, nationality, religion, and language and the rights and empowerment of them need to be addressed in the feminist movement. A common misconception of intersectional feminism is that it dilutes the feminist cause by dividing feminists. However, in actuality, intersectional feminism is inclusive, because by first addressing the needs of those who are the least privileged, the most privileged women will still receive the advantages.

Mainstream feminism, or one-size-fits-all feminism, is the notion that middle class women are the mold that others
The insurrectionist political website Incite lured Jane away from Scarlet in Season 1. What kind of radical, gonzo stuff does it publish? Wikipedia-grade prose about intersectionality!
[196 words]

[Time 6]
Season 4, Episode 5:

“The Pursuit of Happily Ever After” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet

Ask a million people what they think a perfect wedding looks like and you’ll get a million different answers. Some cling to something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue. Some prefer to honor the tradition of the bride and groom and not seeing each other on the day of the wedding until they make it to the altar. Some consider these rules archaic, a relic of a past built on superstition and an age-old patriarchy. This begs t

Apparently, Jane needed 76 words to address what anyone could learn from typing “wedding” into Pinterest: Not all weddings look the same. Also, this is a rip-off of one of Pinstripe’s ledes from Season 1, and it wasn’t clever the first time.
Season 4, Episode 10:

“The Failing Feminist” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet [via voice-over]

“We think we know who we are, who we want to be. But some, most times, the truth gets in the way of that. But when we manage to look truth in the eye, the person who we are is finally revealed. Just like everything, the truth comes with consequences, repercussions. Sometimes it’s painful, but sometimes it’s pure joy.

Living our own truth isn’t always comfortable. But ultimately, it takes us where we need to go.

Season 4, Episode 14:

“Empowerment is Always In: Fashion Through the Ages” by Jane Sloan for Scarlet

As women’s rights have evolved over the centuries—from suffrage to liberation to #MeToo—fashion has evolved right with it.

Each movement has made a visual statement to go along with the iconic voices, leaving a mark that inspires the next movement.

One of Jane’s worst headline attempts. Would make any SEO editor cry. Too bad, because the article itself is really offering some food for thought about fashion and how it’s changed over time.
Season 4, Episode 15:

An untitled piece by Scott Coleman for Scarlet

“HR said it was ‘cause we came in hungover. But everyone in the office was hungover” after the party, Baker recalls. “You should have seen some of the executives. They were the ones pouring us shots.”

Considering that every man kept his job after the party, one could certainly infer that Baker and the other women were let go under dubious—and, let’s face it, sexist—circumstances. But truth is stranger than fiction, as the women fired at Bumani were replaced by other female associate—albeit much older than the ones fired.

The dilemma facing Bumani—this kind of “reverse pretty privilege”—is becoming increasingly common in the corporate world. So much so that Baker, a Georgetown graduate with several endorsements from Bumani, struggles to find a job in this new era of wokeness.

“Honestly, I don’t get it,” Baker says. “Last year, I got offers left and right. Now I can’t get past round one.”

And it’s not just Bumani Investments. It’s Wall Street, and advertising agencies, and consulting firms.

In the post-#MeToo era, too many men don’t trust themselves around young women.
[400 words]

Source: cluture
https://slate.com/culture/2020/07/bold-type-magazine-articles-review.html



Part III: Obstacle



Every Terrible Article Someone Wrote on The Bold Type
A comprehensive guide.

HANNAH KLEIN and HEATHER SCHWEDEL
July 16, 2020

[Paraphrase 7]

The celebrated urbanist Jane Jacobs never hesitated to name an adversary in print. In “The Death and Life of Great American Cities,” from 1961, she takes special care to criticize Catherine Bauer, the most influential member of a cadre of city planners that Jacobs calls “the Decentrists,” though they were more commonly known as “the housers.” Jacobs accused Bauer and her circle of wanting to stifle the organic growth of cities, siphoning their tumultuous energy into sterile satellite settlements that “resist future change,” since “every significant detail must be controlled by the planners from the start and then stuck to.”

Sixty years later, Jacobs’s paean to city life, still in wide circulation, is the place readers are likeliest to encounter Bauer’s name. They might reasonably picture a city planner in the mold of Robert Moses—Jacobs’ most famous opponent, who fought to build a highway through Greenwich Village—though in fact Bauer disliked Moses’ ideas almost as much as Jacobs did. Jacobs presented a democratic vision of urban neighborhoods, in which self-governance naturally gave rise to good places to live; Bauer, by contrast, wanted the state to play the role of both developer and landlord. The planned communities of Bauer’s imagination were indeed designed to resist a form of change: the creeping increase of property values that put decent housing out of reach for many Americans. Jacobs had faith that the old buildings in places like Greenwich Village, as long as they were left standing, would remain affordable. Bauer, convinced the market would always compel people to pay too much for too little, better anticipated the world we live in today.

Bauer’s only major book, “Modern Housing,” published in 1934, was a staple of college reading lists when Jacobs lambasted the housers’ “city-destroying ideas” in “Death and Life.” It spent decades out of print, until its reissue this past April, by the University of Minnesota Press, into the teeth of an economic disaster that may prove as dire as the one that shaped its author. When the stock market crashed in 1929, Bauer was a twenty-four-year-old architecture critic; the beginnings of the Great Depression propelled what she later described as her development from “an aesthete into a housing reformer.” In “Modern Housing,” Bauer makes the case for what critics at the time denounced, more or less accurately, as socialized housing, although she herself framed the issue as a matter of making decent housing a “public utility” and a basic right. She did not think, however, that writing books alone would bring her vision into being. “Movements are not made, when all is said and done, by a handful of specialists,” she writes in the final pages. Change would come only when Americans “demanded a positive program of good housing—not merely for some vague, hypothetical ‘slum-dwellers,’ but for themselves and their families.” After the book’s publication, Bauer put aside her literary career to become a labor organizer and political lobbyist, working to drum up the broad demand she found wanting. She fought to encode her ideas in the New Deal, and largely failed.

In our current economic crisis, there are signs of the kind of mass housing movement that never materialized during the Great Depression. Across the country, activists are urging elected officials to cancel the rent. More than seven hundred and ninety thousand households have gone on rent strike since March, according to the housing-justice coalition We Strike Together, and it seems likely that more will join them when pandemic unemployment assistance runs dry. Many state-level eviction moratoriums are set to expire this summer, and one real-estate analytics firm estimates that twenty-eight million renters may soon be at risk of being turned onto the streets. Black and Latino tenants, more than half of whom were “cost-burdened” before the pandemic—meaning they devoted more than thirty per cent of their earnings to keeping a roof over their families’ heads—will disproportionately struggle to hold onto their homes. Could the cruelty of evicting people in a pandemic finally elevate the demand for a right to housing into a mainstream political issue?

Advertisement
Bauer once wrote, in letters quoted in the architectural historian Barbara Penner’s new foreword to “Modern Housing,” that planners and experts could offer, at best, “something to stir up the imagination” and “strike the spark” to ignite broad desire for change. Almost a century later, the ideas in her book still burn. She draws her utopian image of a different America in so much detail that it begins to feel like a real destination. Republished at an opportune moment, her dispatch from another crisis provides context, and perhaps inspiration, for a movement whose like she desperately longed to see.

Bauer grew up unconcerned about shelter. She was born in 1905 to upper-middle-class parents—her father was a highway engineer—and raised in a three-story house in Elizabeth, New Jersey, a suburb of New York. After graduating from Vassar College in 1926, she discovered modernism on a European tour. She felt drawn to the social ideals expressed in functionalist buildings by architects like Le Corbusier, who famously called a house a “machine” that should generate maximal well being. Bauer was tall and blond, with a frank charisma; “she walked with an enormous stride—you had to run to keep up with her—and always smoked,” one acquaintance remembered. She also possessed a gift for getting to know the right people. Out dancing in Paris, she met the famous Viennese architect Adolf Loos and persuaded him to hire her by the end of the evening. Back in New York, she kept company with artists like Alfred Stieglitz and Georgia O’Keeffe, and began to make her name as a writer.

Her door to the subject that would define her life was a love affair with an older man. In 1929, she met the acclaimed cultural critic Lewis Mumford, who wrote about cities and architecture for The New Yorker, and who would be the “potter,” she once wrote, to her “clay.” The intellectual influence ran both ways: Mumford once wrote that Bauer was “the only pupil and collaborator whom I fully respected.” He introduced her to the Regional Planning Association of America (R.P.A.A.), a star-studded group that included the architects Henry Wright and Clarence Stein and the housing reformer Edith Elmer Wood, and which advocated for American housing that reflected the principles of the English Garden City movement, a plan to create bucolic but socially vibrant suburbs.

Mumford also helped Bauer arrange two trips to Europe to study modernist housing, the second of which they took together, funded by Fortune magazine, which had commissioned Mumford to write a five-article series on European architecture. He brought Bauer as his assistant, which in practice meant that she researched and wrote drafts that appeared, with his edits, under his sole byline. Bauer and Mumford, soon to break up, spent the trip at loggerheads, but were aligned in their aim to mount an argument for the kind of state-subsidized housing then on the rise in countries like England, the Netherlands, and Austria. Their leftist politics scandalized the conservative Fortune, which cancelled the project after three installments. Bauer decided to turn her research into a book in her own name.

“Modern Housing” begins with a history of the Depression-era housing crisis that will sound familiar to contemporary readers. The supposed prosperity of the nineteen-twenties masked rising rents, stagnant wages, and a significant shortage of low-income and middle-class housing. Only the “upper-third income group” could afford the new homes being built, Bauer writes. The problem, she argues, was not so much the real-estate industry as the basic function of the free market. The cost of housing is tied to the value of land, which is determined by “the most intensive”—which is to say, overcrowded—“future use to which a speculator estimates that the plot can be put.” The price of land thus reflects “the lowest housing standards permissible,” driving down standards of living even for the affluent, and consigning the poor to the slums. This is the basis of Bauer’s core argument, which is that housing must be decommodified. Good housing that is “available to the average citizen is not a ‘normal’ product of a capitalist society,” she writes.

Advertisement
The dwellings Bauer aspired to see in America, which she terms “modern housing,” must therefore be “non-speculative”: owned by public entities or nonprofit coöperatives. They must be affordable, with the help of government subsidies, to people on the lowest incomes, while also attracting middle-class residents, who will find them airier and more attractive than the free-market alternatives. That these groups should have access to equal amenities was axiomatic for Bauer. “If you start with sun and air and biological requirements, you cannot say that because this family has only half the income of that family, they should have only half as good an outlook or half as big a playground or half as much water or half a toilet,” she writes. Modern housing cannot be designed one building at a time but rather must be conceived as a town or neighborhood, a practice that controls costs while maximizing shared green space, granting “sunlight, quiet, and a pleasant outlook from every window.”

Such places existed, though not in America. During the twenties, while the U.S. doubled down on a laissez-faire notion of economic prosperity, European nations responded to a post-First World War housing shortage by building at least six million state-subsidized dwellings, four and a half million of which, by Bauer’s calculation, housed “about one seventh” of the families in England, Holland, Germany, and several other countries. (Some survive: more than sixty per cent of residents of Vienna live in social housing today.) The centralized planning of these communities was intended to be more than aesthetically pleasing. Bauer wrote that no modern housing development was complete without a nursery school, and probably also a café. As the historian Gail Radford notes in her classic study of New Deal housing policy, “Modern Housing for America,” Bauer would later promote these shared amenities in the hopes that they would form the basis of “cross-class coalitions” between residents, which could then be converted into political support for more modern housing.

“Modern Housing” was not only a proposal of something new, but also a rejection of what it would replace. “The ideology of individual Home Ownership must go,” Bauer proclaimed. The idea that every American, if he worked hard enough, could someday afford his own plot of land was part of “the realm of mythology,” she wrote—and the Depression had revealed it to be a damaging myth, as half of all mortgages entered default, wiping out the life savings of millions of families. Culturally, Bauer believed that aspiring to homeownership encouraged people “to approach the housing problem in the role of petty capitalists rather than as workers and consumers,” stifling solidarity between people who might benefit from a different system. She concluded her book: “If only a small part of the vast energy which was once directed toward individual home-ownership were now organized to demand a realistic program of modern housing, … then there would be an American housing movement indeed.”

As Bauer was writing “Modern Housing,” the U.S. was beginning to build public housing as part of the Public Works Administration. From the start, the new projects hinted at the troubled place they would hold in American life. Due to a deliberate policy of building housing for Black people in what the agency designated Black neighborhoods, the new developments intensified segregation in cities, or sometimes created it. At the same time, the historian Radford notes that P.W.A. projects for both Black and white residents were far better funded than the public housing of future eras, and were seen as desirable places to live.

The P.W.A. was a temporary agency, but many hoped it would give way to a permanent policy of public housing. The most sustained advocacy arose in the labor movement, which recruited Bauer to lead a new lobbying arm, the Labor Housing Conference, and sent her around the country in search of supporters. “It’s a long jump from a Radical Intellectual to a Labor Skate,” she wrote to a friend from the road, where she lived in cheap hotels or with friends on a budget of six dollars a day. “My old arty self of 1927-Paris would commit suicide at the spectacle—if she were not so thoroughly dead.” In 1935, Senator Robert Wagner, of New York, enlisted Bauer to help draw up a housing bill. The draft legislation would have funded developments for middle- and low-income Americans. Perhaps most radically, Bauer wrote, it included “machinery whereby groups of people who desire to secure better housing for themselves may participate directly in the program,” by forming coöperatives and applying to the government to build developments that they would live in, but not own. The law would have granted tenants control of their surroundings that only homeowners have ever enjoyed.

Advertisement
Bauer’s timing was off. The real-estate industry, on its knees only a few years earlier, had been revived by the New Deal invention of federally backed mortgages, which continue to benefit homeowners today. It succeeded in quashing Bauer’s vision. By the time the U.S. Housing Act passed in 1937, its purview was confined to the poor, a clientele that the real-estate lobby cared little about losing. Like the P.W.A. projects, the new housing would be racially segregated—an abomination that none of the bill’s authors, including Bauer, insisted against. Bauer did try and fail to prevent an amendment tying public housing to so-called slum clearance, which confined most new developments to run-down neighborhoods and left developers the more desirable land in the suburbs. The bill also capped the construction cost of each new dwelling at levels far below the standard set by the P.W.A. Instead of challenging the primacy of private ownership, the resulting housing attached stigma to the idea of a public alternative. As Bauer later wrote, most American public housing “proclaims, visually, that it serves the ‘lowest income group.’ ”

As we face the possibility of repeating this battle, it’s worth knowing what happened last time, and how close we came to living in a different world. As Radford observes, Bauer hoped to tackle the housing crisis with a universalist policy that might have united the poor and the middle class in broad support of a new entitlement. Instead, the New Deal ushered in a two-tiered system that persists to this day: generous tax deductions for the most secure homeowners, and underfunded public housing for the least fortunate. “America’s national housing policy gives affluent homeowners large benefits; middle-class homeowners, smaller benefits; and most renters, who are disproportionately poor, nothing,” the Princeton sociologist Matthew Desmond has written. “It is difficult to think of another social policy that more successfully multiplies America’s inequality.”

The gulf is growing wider in the pandemic. The CARES Act granted anyone with a federally backed mortgage—about seventy per cent of mortgages—the ability to pause payments for up to a year. In June, the real-estate-data-analytics firm Black Knight calculated that the accumulated unpaid principal added up to a trillion-dollar bailout so far. In comparison, the CARES Act earmarked twelve billion dollars for housing, almost all of which was directed to public and subsidized housing and services for the homeless, leaving virtually nothing for low-income tenants struggling to stave off eviction from market-rate rentals.

As in the New Deal era, the map to a different society is sitting on the table, already written. Representative Ilhan Omar has drawn up a bill to cancel rent and mortgage payments for as long as the crisis lasts; Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote another that would halt evictions through March, 2021. In November, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the Green New Deal for Public Housing, a plan to update and decarbonize more than a million units. Just under a week later, Omar introduced the Homes for All Act, a trillion-dollar plan to build twelve million new units of affordable housing—enough to serve the more than ten million Americans, disproportionately Black and Latino, who spend more than half their income on rent. Omar worked with People’s Action, a progressive coalition of grassroots groups; their proposal for a “Homes Guarantee” would build social housing, institute rent control, and pay reparations to Black and Native Americans and other groups harmed by racist housing policies. As Tara Raghuveer, the group’s housing policy lead, said in September, “The theory of the Homes Guarantee is that the market failure has been so profound, we can’t wait around for the market to work.”

Advertisement
Conventional wisdom has it that Americans will never embrace plans like these, that they aspire instead to all the freedoms embodied in one’s own plot of land. Bauer agreed with Jacobs that the power to shape one’s surroundings was paramount; she called “Death and Life” “brilliant,” despite the way it pressed her into service as a useful foil. A home is an intimate incarnation of an individual life, even if it is provided by public means. “Freedom and flexibility are probably the hardest things to achieve with public policy,” Bauer wrote in 1957. “But a country that can devise the insured mortgage (in all its different forms)” can surely “provide some real selection at all economic and social levels.”

It’s easy to abandon hope that we will ever accomplish what “Modern Housing” prescribes, but the book prompts us to remember that history is never as predictable as it looks in hindsight. Bauer emphasizes that there was “no ‘inevitability’” preventing achievements like those of Europe: it took a political movement, including mass protests, to create social housing. Bauer’s defeat wasn’t preordained, either. Radford, finding evidence of excitement about modern housing among union members in the thirties, argues that Bauer simply didn’t have enough time to amass the necessary grassroots support. Picturing a world where she did is a ward against cynicism. The New Deal helped tie homeownership to success in our national imagination. But a country where no one would have to fight for a home is also a longstanding American dream.
[3023 words]

Source: Book
https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/the-depression-era-book-that-wanted-to-cancel-the-rent

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
发表于 2020-7-24 18:53:07 | 显示全部楼层
T2:1'27''
T3:1'48''
T4:1'19''
T5:46''
T6:1'07''
T7:17''
发表于 2020-8-2 08:31:13 | 显示全部楼层
Speak
#14k confirmed number in Florida. If Florida is the country, it will be ranked 4th in the world.
Many cases are led by younger people because they went out and get together.
Testing is back to dely. Demand is really adding.
Some state say people have to wear mask. More America wear mask, we can save more lives.
#CDC should clean its own house first. CDC employee signed the document. 1700 employee get involved so far to gain more fair, equitable status. Feeling of residence.
Black/ Latino people dead 2 times than white people and 3 times to get sick than whites.
# B was killed at home. FBI investigation. Aggressive police action.

Time2 [258 words] 3:00
Time3 [367 words] 2:31
Women fake their orgasm no matter how good men are in bed.  It is easy for men to getting orgasm but more difficult for women. For women, achieving and orgasm is about a confluence of things coming together- literally and figuratively- in a perfect storm
Time4 [372 words] 2:31
Time5 [196 words] 1:49
As our society grows increasingly diverse, how can we ensure inclusivity in the feminist movement? The answer is intersectional feminism
Time6 [400 words] 3:55
saif
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|Archiver|ChaseDream京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

GMT+8, 2020-8-13 14:24 , Processed in 0.071096 second(s), 6 queries , Memcache On.

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2020 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部