Most mothers know the sound of their own child's cry from the moment of birth. From personal experience, I can vouch for the strange ability to discern one's own from all others. If my baby was crying in the hospital nursery, I was halfway down the hall to retrieve him before I realized I'd left the bed.
I like Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis. I admire her intelligence, chutzpah, tenacity and, to be perfectly honest, her enviable continence.
But her elevation to national heroine, essentially owing to her ability to speak for 11 hours straight without a break while wearing (how many times did we hear or read it?) "rouge-red sneakers," is absurd.
The trial of George Zimmerman, accused of fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, inevitably and quickly devolved into a contest of who is more racist -- the victim or the accused?
When it comes to knock-knock jokes, it helps to be 5 years old: You can slap your head, roll your eyes and run outside and play.
What makes the jury interesting, other than the head-snapping reporting of its composition, is that it forces to the fore all the implications we try to avoid: Do gender, race, ethnicity (age, sexual orientation, and so on) matter when it comes to judging one another? We like to think not, yet, admit it, the reason the all-women jury made headlines is because it raises those very questions.
Distilled to a slogan, politics of late goes something like this: "I'm more fertile than you are."
In these post-Snowden days, the notion of anonymity is ludicrous. But so it has been for some time, though recent disclosures bring pause even to the habitually inured. It is one thing for Mrs. McQueen and Mrs. Harry G. Brown, my elderly dowager neighbors from childhood, to spy on each other through their porch screen doors. It is another for the National Security Agency to compile records of one's phone calls.
It is reassuring that in the midst of so much government dysfunction, the IRS has resolved the question of when and whether to tax tanning beds under the Affordable Care Act.
Women are exceeding their male counterparts in education. One in four earns more than her husband. The office may not have a fern bar, but there's likely to be a private space for breast pumping. Our fight for on-site child care has given way to a tsunami of third-world nannies.
You might say I have a dog in this fight.
He's tiny. He's blind. His bark is decidedly unmanly and his bites, usually in defense against things that can't be seen, are forgivably innocuous.
My argument that men should be saved is that, despite certain imperfections, men are fundamentally good and are sort of pleasant to have around. Most women still like to fall in love with them; all children want a father no matter how often we try to persuade ourselves otherwise. If we continue to impose low expectations and negative messaging on men and boys, future women won't have much to choose from.
We are nearly there.
It's good to know that the war on terror is finally over. It was all so ugly, what with the beheadings and bombings.
Women's reproductive rights have enjoyed a half-century or so of well-defined proponents and opponents, but the recently flourishing fertility industry, from egg harvesting to surrogacy, has produced fresh and surprising alliances among former foes.
Breaking news: Conservative organizations suddenly have found common cause with one of their favorite objects of contempt -- the benighted Mainstream Media.
Or as the tea party queen and former Alaska governor likes to put it, the "lamestream media."
In a twist of irony, the two groups have coalesced around a common enemy: the U.S. government.
Mistakes were made.
This, we are supposed to accept, is the conclusion to be drawn about the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya, despite congressional testimony Wednesday suggesting that significant efforts were made to camouflage those mistakes.
As Democrats and Republicans alike know all too well: It's always the cover-up.