Ironically enough the countries on the list don't innovate anything, they just steal other's work. Developing drugs costs money. None of the breakthoughs would exists without a profit motive.
I call bullshit - many many breakthroughs were made by scientists doing 'pure' science. We would NEVER have had, for one random example, lasers, if there had been a profit requirement behind the scientists doing the fundamental science that made it possible.
No it is true. Life existed at only single cell level until Capitalism was invented. Now, there are no Barriers - except Canada. Sad.
You're a moron if you think home ownership is always financially responsible. In many of the most expensive places in the country, your money is much better spent investing in stocks or even bonds than it is paying the ownership premium.
I wonder if that dude was alive in 2007? Sounds like he swallowed the Homowners are superior argument that has been pounded into people just like the A liberal arts degree is superior to any trade argument as well.
If you really wanna go to college, put off buying a house for 10 years after graduation.
If you want to earn money without debt;
- If you don't mind being wet, be a plumber.
- If you don't mind being dirty, be an auto tech. This is going to get cleaner.
- Otherwise, be an electrician.
Wanna pull in some bucks? Become a machinist. A master machinist is pulling down a nice salary. And the knowledge is a rough equivalent of a Master's degree, except it's earned over time, and you get paid well while you are earning it.
The problem unfortunately is the long lived idea that unless you have that college degree - any degree at all, you are elite, much better than those neanderthals who were so stupid that they had to become a mason or plumber or technician of any sort.
Way back in High School, I decided that I would take a double major, Adademic path as well as Electronics at the County Trade school. It was difficult juggling all the requirements of both. I never had a study hall or lunch in high school. and all kind of weird things happened like I had to skip one year of Physical-ed, then my senior year I had it every day.
But I recall my guidance counsellor continually trying to get me to drop the Technical part and go straight Academic path. Then I even got pulled out of class to meet with the Principle. "You're a really smart boy, Ol - people are going to think you're stupid if you go to "Tech school". But I didn't listen.
Best decision I ever made. By the time I entered the work force I could support myself, and then have my college education mostly paid for by my employer. I could perform both academic and practical functions.
The biggest thing it taught me was that the so called smart people, who were soooo smart about matters of education, were actually lame ass clones. Turned me into a skeptic about most everything.
Many plumbers work in construction, great when there's a building boom, shitty when there isn't. Even the number of mechanics seems to be dropping. Remember when every gas station had a mechanic? That was partially due to cars that needed fixing a lot more then now and eventually with the move to electric cars they'll be a lot less call for mechanics.
As usual, if you're really good at what you do or have the kind of personality that allows you to form your own successful business, you might have stable employment.
Make certain you go to University and get hat Liberal Arts degree. Thos degrees have a good track record of stable secure jobs.
In the fast food and retail outlet industries.
Next time you need a plumber, call a Philosophy or Gender studies major.
Really you should have asked her what she thinks about celebrating Nazi culture. Should we have a day for it?
That's an interesting point/question.
I also think that it is a pitfall of ideology. In modern far left ideology, the evil among us is "white" people, and the pinnacle of evil is the male. So we now have a shitstorm about Hank Azaria doing the voice of Apu, the convenience store owner on the Simpson's cartoon.
But back to the point. The ideologue has a need to separate camps into good and bad. Since Western man has been determined to be evil, the others must be good.
This leads to acts that are not sane. Taking an example from the right wing, In Alabama, Republicans en masse turned out to vote for a candidate who was suspended twice as a judge, and likes the young ladies a bit too much. He only missed being elected by Democrats being revolted enough to come out and vote
It's also led to an actual Nazi and Holocaust denier to run for office in Illinois and win the Republican nomination.
Ideology, ahhh, what it brings humans to. But this case isn't about right wing kooks, for as a balancing act, we have plenty of left wing kooks as well.
When Whites and especially the men of the species are a priori the evil among us, the non-whites are the a priori non-evil.
So it really comes as no surprise that the far left starts pulling the same stunts. Cherish some cultures that do some really awful things to women. Because Whites and their men are evil. Its a non-sequitur, but it makes more sense than trying to re-define words and not mentioning the issue of infibulation while going nuts about the way men sit on buses in your own country and making it an actual crime.
I do not for a moment doubt that these left-wingers are/would be horrified about the crimes (in our "evil" western culture) being performed on women and children in some of the cultures they have pre-desgnated as good because they have already designated ours as evil.
But it shows just how powerful ideology is, enabling you to support the exact opposite of what you claim to support. And exposes that the true evil is ideology.
To your original question about cherishing Nazis, I think that she would have turned a hundred shades of red, stuttered a few times, then breathed a sigh of relief when she could announce that they were white and an example of the western patriarchy, so not eligible for cherishment.
"Misogynist — A man who hates women as much as women hate one another."
-- H.L. Mencken, 1949
I looked up some Mencken quotes, and came up with this one - "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
Useable by any political persuasion.
Sorry, I didn't meant to imply you were lying. Memory is sometimes unreliable, but I'm sure your recollection of this incident is perfect.
Anyway, with that cleared up, do you actually disagree with the point being made here?
The word used was definitely cherish and she definitely wouldn't answer the question. Those are the kind of details that don't go away.
But aside from that, I don't think that there should be men only or woman only jobs.
disclaimer - there are some positions such as sexual assault counselor where the victim would probably greatly prefer someone of the same sex to interact with, or careers where extreme physical strength is needed, but almost all careers should not have a sex mandate.
Fair question re Saudi or Middle East/North Africa custom
or maybe let's not pick one nation. What if -- hypothetical question alert -- a recently discovered tribe practiced cannibalism, and they had chosen an oil-rich spot for their settlement?
Far left would cherish the cannabalism as a cultural norm, far right would applaud it as long as they could get the oil. Strange bedfellows indeed.
The term "Cherish other cultures" is in wide use in diversity literature.
Merely that the tendency to take everything by a strict dictionary definition and avoid discussing the actual issue is just dragging the debate down into semantics and trivialities.
As I related in my true story - I asked the question of how Diversity - Cherishing other cultures - could be reconciled with women's rights. There was no discussion allowed.
There is a reason for that. The far left wing version of cognitive dissonance. Somehow, someway, the plight of women in many cultures is ignored, and a preference to attack the apparently more pressing problems of how men sit on public transportation as opposed to infibulation. or marriage to prepubescent girls is engaged. Are there crimes against women in the west? Sure. but not an integral part of the culture.
I've never been able to engage a modern feminist in a discussion of those matters. Very much like my inability to engage in discussions with far right wing social conservatives about their massive inconsistencies and contradictions.
Your's is a good example, the insinuation that I was lying about a stupid word.
Mine is a sad affirmation that feminists aren't demonstrably terribly worried about the plight of women in other countries, and more worried about men winking at them.
Wrong question, you're making an appeal to authority, an assumption that some *person* should be doing the deciding. That's a bad approach. Of course you're not really asking the question, you know it's a bad approach and you know that anyone reading it will know it's a bad approach, so you're asking the question rhetorically in an effort to discredit the notion that any decision is right. That's underhanded argumentation. Say what you mean.
Okay I'll make it simple. I won't cherish cultures that brutalize women as an integral part of that culture. Howbow dat? Clear enough?
The right question is what *principles* should be used to decide. Obviously, not everyone will agree on the principles, which is why we fall back on democratic ideals. To avoid tyrannies of the majority, we use democratic processes to decide broad, high-level principles rather than to answer specific questions. Then we apply reason and debate to those principles.
I don't support or cherish cultures that brutlize women as an integral part of that culture. At it's simplest, the golden rule. Bill and Ted "Be excellent to each other."
In this case, the core principle is that of freedom. Cultures are free to do what they want, but that freedom ends where it begins infringing on the freedom of individuals (of course, we make exceptions where to allow too much individual freedom causes bad outcomes for society as a whole -- there's a balance to be found. Yes, this is hard.). The notion that women are morally equal to men (which isn't saying they're the same as men) means that they should have the same opportunities to compete for the jobs based on their ability to do the job.
Now since I simplified what I wrote - howbow you do it?
I'll try to write this at the lowest level I can:
I do not support or cherish Chinese culture having male only jobs.
I do not support or cherish Saudi Arabia culture burying women up to their neck and killing them for adultery. Especially when the man in the tryst isn't punished. Or preventing them from exercising the same rights as males.
I do not support or cherish the fact that in many African cultures young girls are mutilated by cutting off their clitorises.
I do not support the cultural practice in places like Yemen where prepubescent girls are forced into marriage to old man. Here id part of a culture we are supposed to Cherish http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... Seriously - 8 freaking years old. And not as a crime, but a part of the culture. People can argue about the age of consent being at puberty, but 8 year old girls are not mechanically ready for sex. At all.
And I don't support the Chinses Men only jobs
Now back to the way I normally write.
I believe that men and women are equal. And the dversity people who want me to cherish all of the above cultures, but are having shitting hemmorage over China and their male only jobs are suffering from some severe magnitude issues. "It's okay to be in an outrage about who can fill out a job application, but let's go on the downlow about clitorectomies. Don't want to offend the culture." Fuck that - it's wrong and it will always be wrong. Damn - I gotta question the moral compass of people like that.
Back to simple: Come back and lose y'all's shit over Job Applicatinos after you save some women's lives.
I'll give up on my equality is superior to diversity and my right to point out the hypocrisy of Diversity supporters when they excute me - perhaps by the cultural tradition of public beheading as practiced in Saudi Arabia. That would be somehow fitting.
>
I argue that this freedom for women trumps the freedom of Chinese culture to restrict their role in society. Do you actually disagree? On what basis?
And someone made a comment about adopting parts of a culture. That's called "cultural appropriation" and it's currently a Very Bad Thing. It used to be that nobody cared if the owner of a Mexican restaurant was Mexican; today, if you try to "appropriate" Mexican culture by serving Mexican food you are boycotted and forced to apologize. That happened in our fair town not long ago.
If the fact that people are fucking starving to death for lack of any nutrition. And these cry bullies bitch about where the food might have come from and whop cooks it. Anyone who whines cries and bawls and bitches about Cultural appropriation is the exact definition of an overly coddled child, who freak out when their every whim is not satisfied. Almost beneath contempt.
So how would having a housewife benefit you there? Are you saying she should enjoy your kayaks and video games? Given equality, you've got at best a 50% chance of being the househusband and having some of that free time. It's usually financially advisable for one person to go forth and earn the money, since switching off replaces a salary for an experienced person with a salary for a newbie.
What you want is the ability to spend less time at work and more at home, and that's not related to having one or both members of a household working.
Depends. As I noted in another post, my Father bought his house in 1960, and it took only a fraction of the money that it takes now for a ssimilar home. A large part of that present fact is that with two incomes being the norm, so there is wage suppression. There is also aggressive real estate techniques convincing people to buy houses they can ill afford.
Regardless, the stay at home fathers on our block are some of the happiest guys I know. The paycheck should not be the determinant of who stays home, but who feels the need to be empowered to make that paycheck.
Outside of the sexual innuendo, she is tall and slender. So if people think fat shaming is bad, you ought to see the shit women sling at other women if they think a woman is not fat enough.
That is so true. My wife is short and slender (Asian) and women at her work and in her friend circle use mock "concern" for her weight and exercise habits. She's 5'2" and 110lbs, about 30lbs. north of anorexia and definitely not "skinny". But the fat women will make sure she's "okay", make sure that her husband isn't forcing her to exercise hard and eat less, etc. It's crazy how jealous they get and then pretend that they're really concerned for her.
I hear ya brother. We hear continuously how men have to change in order to accommodate women in the workplace. Perhaps women in general have some changes to accomodate each other. Backstabbing was a big problem at work. Men had a tendency to have a quick argument and it was over with. Many of the sweet to their face but the minute the other woman walked out of the room "I hate that bitch" situations justy led to complicated drama.
The women scientists and engineers were largely lacking in that problem. And many of the administrative women also. But just like my wife, guess who were the subject of slanderous attacks. And guess who performed them? Wasn't the men.
This is why social media projects like #mentorher won't work. Watch how I'm jumped on for saying that both sexes need to compromise and fix their problems. How can we mentor someone who is likely to take the mentoring as mansplaining and complain to HR about it?
Cherish means "protect and care for (someone) lovingly", "hold (something) dear", or "keep (a hope or ambition) in one's mind".
It's entirely possible to care deeply for someone or something, while recognizing they have flaws, and working to improve them precisely because you do care/cherish them. It's the dichotomy of being human, no one is perfect, everyone has flaws. All we can do is to seek to improve ourselves and help others improve.
Yeah. maybe your kid isn't good with money, and maybe I'm the most irritating bastard on the planet. But I actually have people who are quite fond of me. Cherish even.
Trying to equate that with clitorectomy or stoning adulteresses (but oinly the adulteress - not the adulterer is silly at best, condoming at worst.
The statement was not meant to imply that every aspect of a culture should be cherished without question, merely that the good aspects if it should not be dismissed because they are different to our own.
You can argue over the semantics but orlanz is still right about this. It's a shame the councillor didn't explain it.
It must be tremendous to believe that any word can mean whatever you want it to mean.
cherish has a very distinct and unambiguous meaning. If m daughter is abused by her husband, perhaps he beats her, bur is active in philantopy work - I do not cherish him. If a culture multilates women's genitals, or stones them to death after digging a hole in the ground, brying them neck deep than has a jolly old time smashingt her head to pieces and killing her - yet the man shw might have committed adultry with gets no punishment at all. If a old man has sex with an 8 year old girl after a forced marriage, an act whiich in western culture is rape pure and simple - no . NO I am not going to cherish that. That's cave man culture, and is cruel and terribly destructive of women.
You might want to mince and re-define words in order to not upset these people, but make no mistake - you are tolerating terrible crimes against women and children and demanding I cherish it?
Seriously the far left has their own version of the far right's idea that the only humans that have the right to life are those who haven't been born yet.
You just "cherish" some culture's actual destruction of women while being outraged about Western men winking at women. As 30 percent of young women define as sexual harassment.
Just because we say all cultures should be cherished doesn't mean we must accept all aspects of their cultures.
If we don't accept all aspects of their cultures, then we don't cherish them. Cherish means "protect and care for (someone) lovingly", "hold (something) dear", or "keep (a hope or ambition) in one's mind". If you want to change it, you're not protecting and caring for it in its current state. If you hold it dear, you don't want to change it. If it's your hope or ambition, you don't want to change it — you want to implement it.
We should not cherish cultures which are abusive. And we should cherish our fucking dictionaries so that we can have meaningful conversations.
You just won the internet for this week Drinkypoo. A double shot of truth.
Slashdot Mirror
So...20 days late? Not bad.
It was coming earlier, but a blue screen was affecting some users. Hence the delay.
Blue Screens - the one Windows legacy that will be with us always.
So...20 days late? Not bad.
It was coming earlier, but a blue screen was affecting some users. Hence the delay.
20 years late would be better.
Ironically enough the countries on the list don't innovate anything, they just steal other's work. Developing drugs costs money. None of the breakthoughs would exists without a profit motive.
I call bullshit - many many breakthroughs were made by scientists doing 'pure' science. We would NEVER have had, for one random example, lasers, if there had been a profit requirement behind the scientists doing the fundamental science that made it possible.
No it is true. Life existed at only single cell level until Capitalism was invented. Now, there are no Barriers - except Canada. Sad.
See subject: Ol Olsoc you EAT "do-do" after your false accusation I don't write my code https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=9875023&cid=53281611/ and you are obviously a Zontar The Mindless sockpuppet appearing in a thread where he is too (go figure since you're KNOWN to make sockpuppets to troll me Zontar https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5038387&cid=46782891/ by your own admission).
* You FAIL fool... busted.
APK
P.S.=> Your dull "ne'er-do-well" easily out-thought brains make me laugh... apk
Life is long and hard, little anonymous coward. It's even longer and harder when you suffer from metastasis of the humor gland. Bummer that.
Silicon Valley.....well, I'm in the Silicon Forest, somewhat north, but yes, my housing is much more reasonable, as is my food and gas.
Good - I hate it when I can't reason with my food or gas. 8^P Sorry, I'm in Robin Williams mode today.
You're a moron if you think home ownership is always financially responsible. In many of the most expensive places in the country, your money is much better spent investing in stocks or even bonds than it is paying the ownership premium.
I wonder if that dude was alive in 2007? Sounds like he swallowed the Homowners are superior argument that has been pounded into people just like the A liberal arts degree is superior to any trade argument as well.
You are, buddy. Don't let anyone tell you different. Stay strong, and never back down.
Oh - I thought he meant do-do 'er.
No, it's dead on.
Best advice to your high schooler:
If you really wanna go to college, put off buying a house for 10 years after graduation.
If you want to earn money without debt;
- If you don't mind being wet, be a plumber. - If you don't mind being dirty, be an auto tech. This is going to get cleaner. - Otherwise, be an electrician.
Wanna pull in some bucks? Become a machinist. A master machinist is pulling down a nice salary. And the knowledge is a rough equivalent of a Master's degree, except it's earned over time, and you get paid well while you are earning it.
The problem unfortunately is the long lived idea that unless you have that college degree - any degree at all, you are elite, much better than those neanderthals who were so stupid that they had to become a mason or plumber or technician of any sort.
Way back in High School, I decided that I would take a double major, Adademic path as well as Electronics at the County Trade school. It was difficult juggling all the requirements of both. I never had a study hall or lunch in high school. and all kind of weird things happened like I had to skip one year of Physical-ed, then my senior year I had it every day.
But I recall my guidance counsellor continually trying to get me to drop the Technical part and go straight Academic path. Then I even got pulled out of class to meet with the Principle. "You're a really smart boy, Ol - people are going to think you're stupid if you go to "Tech school". But I didn't listen.
Best decision I ever made. By the time I entered the work force I could support myself, and then have my college education mostly paid for by my employer. I could perform both academic and practical functions.
The biggest thing it taught me was that the so called smart people, who were soooo smart about matters of education, were actually lame ass clones. Turned me into a skeptic about most everything.
Many plumbers work in construction, great when there's a building boom, shitty when there isn't. Even the number of mechanics seems to be dropping. Remember when every gas station had a mechanic? That was partially due to cars that needed fixing a lot more then now and eventually with the move to electric cars they'll be a lot less call for mechanics. As usual, if you're really good at what you do or have the kind of personality that allows you to form your own successful business, you might have stable employment.
Make certain you go to University and get hat Liberal Arts degree. Thos degrees have a good track record of stable secure jobs.
In the fast food and retail outlet industries.
Next time you need a plumber, call a Philosophy or Gender studies major.
"What you in for Pal?"
"I murderd my children and cooked them? You?"
"Made Windows restore disks."
"Jeezuz Christ - your a fucking animal!"
Then Lundgrun was shanked in the shower the next day. I mean even crooks have some honor.
Microsoft truly is a festering carbuncle on the asshole of the Universe. As for it's fans? Good for ya.
Really you should have asked her what she thinks about celebrating Nazi culture. Should we have a day for it?
That's an interesting point/question.
I also think that it is a pitfall of ideology. In modern far left ideology, the evil among us is "white" people, and the pinnacle of evil is the male. So we now have a shitstorm about Hank Azaria doing the voice of Apu, the convenience store owner on the Simpson's cartoon.
But back to the point. The ideologue has a need to separate camps into good and bad. Since Western man has been determined to be evil, the others must be good.
This leads to acts that are not sane. Taking an example from the right wing, In Alabama, Republicans en masse turned out to vote for a candidate who was suspended twice as a judge, and likes the young ladies a bit too much. He only missed being elected by Democrats being revolted enough to come out and vote
It's also led to an actual Nazi and Holocaust denier to run for office in Illinois and win the Republican nomination.
Ideology, ahhh, what it brings humans to. But this case isn't about right wing kooks, for as a balancing act, we have plenty of left wing kooks as well.
When Whites and especially the men of the species are a priori the evil among us, the non-whites are the a priori non-evil.
So it really comes as no surprise that the far left starts pulling the same stunts. Cherish some cultures that do some really awful things to women. Because Whites and their men are evil. Its a non-sequitur, but it makes more sense than trying to re-define words and not mentioning the issue of infibulation while going nuts about the way men sit on buses in your own country and making it an actual crime.
I do not for a moment doubt that these left-wingers are/would be horrified about the crimes (in our "evil" western culture) being performed on women and children in some of the cultures they have pre-desgnated as good because they have already designated ours as evil.
But it shows just how powerful ideology is, enabling you to support the exact opposite of what you claim to support. And exposes that the true evil is ideology. To your original question about cherishing Nazis, I think that she would have turned a hundred shades of red, stuttered a few times, then breathed a sigh of relief when she could announce that they were white and an example of the western patriarchy, so not eligible for cherishment.
"Misogynist — A man who hates women as much as women hate one another." -- H.L. Mencken, 1949
I looked up some Mencken quotes, and came up with this one - "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." Useable by any political persuasion.
And these cry bullies bitch about where the food might have come from and whop cooks it.
Oh man, the ethnic insults are flying fast and furious in this thread! :-D
You need to be sent back to Cultural Sensitivity Camp.
Oh shit! Of all of the typos....I'm still laughing so hard I'm crying. Damn, where's autocorrect when you need it!
Sorry, I didn't meant to imply you were lying. Memory is sometimes unreliable, but I'm sure your recollection of this incident is perfect.
Anyway, with that cleared up, do you actually disagree with the point being made here?
The word used was definitely cherish and she definitely wouldn't answer the question. Those are the kind of details that don't go away.
But aside from that, I don't think that there should be men only or woman only jobs.
disclaimer - there are some positions such as sexual assault counselor where the victim would probably greatly prefer someone of the same sex to interact with, or careers where extreme physical strength is needed, but almost all careers should not have a sex mandate.
Fair question re Saudi or Middle East/North Africa custom
or maybe let's not pick one nation. What if -- hypothetical question alert -- a recently discovered tribe practiced cannibalism, and they had chosen an oil-rich spot for their settlement?
Far left would cherish the cannabalism as a cultural norm, far right would applaud it as long as they could get the oil. Strange bedfellows indeed.
To be clear, I'm not saying it's the best choice of words, or even a good choice... If that was even the word used.
Why would it not be the word used? Enough with the "Ol Olsoc is lying" insinuation.
https://www.good.is/articles/u...
http://www.scholarcritic.com/p...
http://www.schoolingsystems.co...
The term "Cherish other cultures" is in wide use in diversity literature.
Merely that the tendency to take everything by a strict dictionary definition and avoid discussing the actual issue is just dragging the debate down into semantics and trivialities.
As I related in my true story - I asked the question of how Diversity - Cherishing other cultures - could be reconciled with women's rights. There was no discussion allowed.
There is a reason for that. The far left wing version of cognitive dissonance. Somehow, someway, the plight of women in many cultures is ignored, and a preference to attack the apparently more pressing problems of how men sit on public transportation as opposed to infibulation. or marriage to prepubescent girls is engaged. Are there crimes against women in the west? Sure. but not an integral part of the culture.
I've never been able to engage a modern feminist in a discussion of those matters. Very much like my inability to engage in discussions with far right wing social conservatives about their massive inconsistencies and contradictions.
Your's is a good example, the insinuation that I was lying about a stupid word.
Mine is a sad affirmation that feminists aren't demonstrably terribly worried about the plight of women in other countries, and more worried about men winking at them.
Wrong question, you're making an appeal to authority, an assumption that some *person* should be doing the deciding. That's a bad approach. Of course you're not really asking the question, you know it's a bad approach and you know that anyone reading it will know it's a bad approach, so you're asking the question rhetorically in an effort to discredit the notion that any decision is right. That's underhanded argumentation. Say what you mean.
Okay I'll make it simple. I won't cherish cultures that brutalize women as an integral part of that culture. Howbow dat? Clear enough?
The right question is what *principles* should be used to decide. Obviously, not everyone will agree on the principles, which is why we fall back on democratic ideals. To avoid tyrannies of the majority, we use democratic processes to decide broad, high-level principles rather than to answer specific questions. Then we apply reason and debate to those principles.
I don't support or cherish cultures that brutlize women as an integral part of that culture. At it's simplest, the golden rule. Bill and Ted "Be excellent to each other."
In this case, the core principle is that of freedom. Cultures are free to do what they want, but that freedom ends where it begins infringing on the freedom of individuals (of course, we make exceptions where to allow too much individual freedom causes bad outcomes for society as a whole -- there's a balance to be found. Yes, this is hard.). The notion that women are morally equal to men (which isn't saying they're the same as men) means that they should have the same opportunities to compete for the jobs based on their ability to do the job.
Now since I simplified what I wrote - howbow you do it?
I'll try to write this at the lowest level I can:
I do not support or cherish Chinese culture having male only jobs.
I do not support or cherish Saudi Arabia culture burying women up to their neck and killing them for adultery. Especially when the man in the tryst isn't punished. Or preventing them from exercising the same rights as males.
I do not support or cherish the fact that in many African cultures young girls are mutilated by cutting off their clitorises.
I do not support the cultural practice in places like Yemen where prepubescent girls are forced into marriage to old man. Here id part of a culture we are supposed to Cherish http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... Seriously - 8 freaking years old. And not as a crime, but a part of the culture. People can argue about the age of consent being at puberty, but 8 year old girls are not mechanically ready for sex. At all.
And I don't support the Chinses Men only jobs
Now back to the way I normally write.
I believe that men and women are equal. And the dversity people who want me to cherish all of the above cultures, but are having shitting hemmorage over China and their male only jobs are suffering from some severe magnitude issues. "It's okay to be in an outrage about who can fill out a job application, but let's go on the downlow about clitorectomies. Don't want to offend the culture." Fuck that - it's wrong and it will always be wrong. Damn - I gotta question the moral compass of people like that.
Back to simple: Come back and lose y'all's shit over Job Applicatinos after you save some women's lives.
I'll give up on my equality is superior to diversity and my right to point out the hypocrisy of Diversity supporters when they excute me - perhaps by the cultural tradition of public beheading as practiced in Saudi Arabia. That would be somehow fitting.
>
I argue that this freedom for women trumps the freedom of Chinese culture to restrict their role in society. Do you actually disagree? On what basis?
And someone made a comment about adopting parts of a culture. That's called "cultural appropriation" and it's currently a Very Bad Thing. It used to be that nobody cared if the owner of a Mexican restaurant was Mexican; today, if you try to "appropriate" Mexican culture by serving Mexican food you are boycotted and forced to apologize. That happened in our fair town not long ago.
https://spoonuniversity.com/li... https://everydayfeminism.com/2... http://rightnow.org.au/opinion... And many more -
If the fact that people are fucking starving to death for lack of any nutrition. And these cry bullies bitch about where the food might have come from and whop cooks it. Anyone who whines cries and bawls and bitches about Cultural appropriation is the exact definition of an overly coddled child, who freak out when their every whim is not satisfied. Almost beneath contempt.
So how would having a housewife benefit you there? Are you saying she should enjoy your kayaks and video games? Given equality, you've got at best a 50% chance of being the househusband and having some of that free time. It's usually financially advisable for one person to go forth and earn the money, since switching off replaces a salary for an experienced person with a salary for a newbie.
What you want is the ability to spend less time at work and more at home, and that's not related to having one or both members of a household working.
Depends. As I noted in another post, my Father bought his house in 1960, and it took only a fraction of the money that it takes now for a ssimilar home. A large part of that present fact is that with two incomes being the norm, so there is wage suppression. There is also aggressive real estate techniques convincing people to buy houses they can ill afford.
Regardless, the stay at home fathers on our block are some of the happiest guys I know. The paycheck should not be the determinant of who stays home, but who feels the need to be empowered to make that paycheck.
Outside of the sexual innuendo, she is tall and slender. So if people think fat shaming is bad, you ought to see the shit women sling at other women if they think a woman is not fat enough.
That is so true. My wife is short and slender (Asian) and women at her work and in her friend circle use mock "concern" for her weight and exercise habits. She's 5'2" and 110lbs, about 30lbs. north of anorexia and definitely not "skinny". But the fat women will make sure she's "okay", make sure that her husband isn't forcing her to exercise hard and eat less, etc. It's crazy how jealous they get and then pretend that they're really concerned for her.
I hear ya brother. We hear continuously how men have to change in order to accommodate women in the workplace. Perhaps women in general have some changes to accomodate each other. Backstabbing was a big problem at work. Men had a tendency to have a quick argument and it was over with. Many of the sweet to their face but the minute the other woman walked out of the room "I hate that bitch" situations justy led to complicated drama.
The women scientists and engineers were largely lacking in that problem. And many of the administrative women also. But just like my wife, guess who were the subject of slanderous attacks. And guess who performed them? Wasn't the men.
This is why social media projects like #mentorher won't work. Watch how I'm jumped on for saying that both sexes need to compromise and fix their problems. How can we mentor someone who is likely to take the mentoring as mansplaining and complain to HR about it?
TL:DR; It is nice to live in the west in this day and age, but don't walk around criticizing other cultures like your shit don't stink.
Quick reply - you just spent time criticising German culture - is this a claim that your excrement doesn't stink?
All cultures have issues. But telling me to shut the fuck up is perhaps a cultural affect of your own.
Cherish means "protect and care for (someone) lovingly", "hold (something) dear", or "keep (a hope or ambition) in one's mind".
It's entirely possible to care deeply for someone or something, while recognizing they have flaws, and working to improve them precisely because you do care/cherish them. It's the dichotomy of being human, no one is perfect, everyone has flaws. All we can do is to seek to improve ourselves and help others improve.
Yeah. maybe your kid isn't good with money, and maybe I'm the most irritating bastard on the planet. But I actually have people who are quite fond of me. Cherish even.
Trying to equate that with clitorectomy or stoning adulteresses (but oinly the adulteress - not the adulterer is silly at best, condoming at worst.
The statement was not meant to imply that every aspect of a culture should be cherished without question, merely that the good aspects if it should not be dismissed because they are different to our own.
You can argue over the semantics but orlanz is still right about this. It's a shame the councillor didn't explain it.
It must be tremendous to believe that any word can mean whatever you want it to mean.
cherish has a very distinct and unambiguous meaning. If m daughter is abused by her husband, perhaps he beats her, bur is active in philantopy work - I do not cherish him. If a culture multilates women's genitals, or stones them to death after digging a hole in the ground, brying them neck deep than has a jolly old time smashingt her head to pieces and killing her - yet the man shw might have committed adultry with gets no punishment at all. If a old man has sex with an 8 year old girl after a forced marriage, an act whiich in western culture is rape pure and simple - no . NO I am not going to cherish that. That's cave man culture, and is cruel and terribly destructive of women.
You might want to mince and re-define words in order to not upset these people, but make no mistake - you are tolerating terrible crimes against women and children and demanding I cherish it?
Seriously the far left has their own version of the far right's idea that the only humans that have the right to life are those who haven't been born yet. You just "cherish" some culture's actual destruction of women while being outraged about Western men winking at women. As 30 percent of young women define as sexual harassment.
Just because we say all cultures should be cherished doesn't mean we must accept all aspects of their cultures.
If we don't accept all aspects of their cultures, then we don't cherish them. Cherish means "protect and care for (someone) lovingly", "hold (something) dear", or "keep (a hope or ambition) in one's mind". If you want to change it, you're not protecting and caring for it in its current state. If you hold it dear, you don't want to change it. If it's your hope or ambition, you don't want to change it — you want to implement it.
We should not cherish cultures which are abusive. And we should cherish our fucking dictionaries so that we can have meaningful conversations.
You just won the internet for this week Drinkypoo. A double shot of truth.