This isn't a free speech issues. A) because you're not banned from saying or wearing such things. It's just that companies are essentially required by law to provide a safe and respectable work space. B) obscenity is not protected public speech. There are Supreme Court cases involving this. If it is reasonably considered obscene then the speech is not absolutely protected.
sexism - 1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women 2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
We can argue over the second definition, but the first one is clearly inappropriate for the majority of contexts.
Maybe it's the annual sexual harassment training, but that shirt can create a hostile (not as in, someone is going to hurt you) work environment. He only has to wear it once too. It doesn't have to be ongoing or repeated. It could definitely be construed as sexual harassment. You can argue philosophically with that all day; but legally, at least in the US, it would be.
Telling you the game contains sexist attitudes is not telling you it's not appropriate.
Yes it is, in today's society sexism is inappropriate. Therefore, saying that game A is incredibly sexist is telling you that it is incredibly inappropriate.
It's about portraying women with degrading properties, when men are not.
You have not been paying attention to games or any other form of creative media. Every anti-hero in any game is a character given degrading properties. You have ignorant buffoon male characters in numerous games. Take the blinders off please. The only reason you don't recognize it when it comes up is because men can be given any quality and it not be considered some statement about men in real life (e.g. oh he's just a lazy alcoholic, not all men are alcoholics). But if it's a woman, then it somehow morphs into a statement about all women, instead of that one, individual character in the story. You can't have it both ways, if characters in games are a reflection of their labels in real life, then it applies to both sexes.
And while we're on the subject of degrading properties, this is irrelevant to the above point but. Most gamers who had played the older Metroid games, were annoyed to pissed that Samus was neutered to be a dependent know nothing in some of the recent Metroid games.
I give a shit to the people who assume misogyny. Maybe it's my pedantic nature, but displaying sexy women on a shirt at work is at worse sexual harassment, not misogyny.
If it's using the Bechdel test as a basis, it at least implicitly mentions women. From wikipedia "Bechdel test"
The Bechdel test asks if a work of fiction features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added.
Definitions, definitions, definitions. It can't be a war crime if no one ever made it a crime. There was no law or agreed conduct of warfare during WW2 that forbade the usage of atomic weapons. This is opposed to the German's genocide, the Japanese's horrific treatment of prisoners of war, etc.
Are you seriously suggesting that they didn't have any rough idea what it would do?
Knowing what a weapon could do and moral judgements are two different things. Your question is irrelevant. That said, no one knew that the long term effects of the bombs at the time. And you can't judge the initial blast any more really than you can any other country's bombing of cities during the war. In fact, the US' fire bombing campaign claimed more Japanese lives than the two bomb drops did (initially).
It is a basic ethical truth that two wrongs don't make a right.
I'm unsure how the use in wartime would classify as terrorism. Further, how moral judgements of the actions can be made when it was the first usage of such a weapon against an enemy force. Even more so when, Germany and Japan were both attempting to develop the same weaponry for use.
"They got cheaper gas that they weren't entitled to."
They were only supposed to use the gas for business purposes related to their NASA work, but they used it for their own personal use as well. People say "big deal" to this stuff, but it's serious. Those rules are in place so that corruption and nepotism in government contracting is at a minimum.
LMAO wow, the point went completely over your head. If you think this: "The Earth is only 400 thousand years old?" is equivalent to suggesting what you say...wow, just wow...Particularly after this, "That's what I thought, but the link [you give] only shows a 400,000 year window."
No the point is, excusing the boshe ice core citation and the bell curve comment (wth does that have to do with anything), we are colder than it has been historically.
Exactly this, I'm not sure what "ghosts" have to do with this. If I make someone think there's someone behind them, they'll think there's someone behind them.
Important thing to note. Because of the speed those satellites are traveling, they have to make adjustments to their clocks every so often. As they end up being behind by micro-seconds.
My response to someone not liking beer (on taste alone) is they haven't found the right beer. Blue Moon tastes nothing like Stella Artois, etc etc. Some are more bitter, some more hoppy, some have a fruity taste.
What I'm getting is, if they take a bunch of particles together in the right combination, then they no longer emit or react to photons? A) huh? B) so invisibility cloak anyone?
Now what the morons in MO have done, does nothing to explain any of what happened. Where are the hospital records of the officers injuries, do these dip-shit pigs have in car cameras?
First, no they didn't have cameras, but that's irrelevant, as the shooting and altercation would've happened behind the camera. At most, you'd get audio, which would only corroborate what is already known. Scuffle at car (see Brown's blood in police car and close range gun shot to hand), and some fired shots. You might hear some of the words used during the altercation and that's it.
Second, HIPAA (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa...e/privacyrule/) the hospital records are not going to be released until the trial. That's even if it get's to trial. As the Grand Jury, who surely has the hospital records, is deliberating on whether Wilson will be charged.
The Bush's timetable argument is so full of holes it's pitiful to see someone use it. First, the administration were in negotiations to keep troops there. Malaki didn't want to give US troops immunity so Obama said no deal and didn't renew the treaty. Now second, it could be said that by not pushing Malaki on the immunity was due to his political stance on the issue. But the reasoning probably was, that if he just outright decided to nix renewing the treaty, he'd get hit over the head when ISIS or some other radical group popped up because of early withdrawal, so he feigned renegotiation.
So when in 2012 he was seeking reelection he could say, "I kept my promise to get troops out of Iraq." But when shit hit the fan, like everyone was saying it would, he could say, "I tried to renegotiate a Status of Forces treaty, but the Iraqis didn't want to play ball." And it's been shown to be BS. Given the recent memoir from Panetta.
That's one of my prime issues with Obama, he never manages to own up to his f-ups. He always finds someone else to blame, or some excuse as to why he screwed up. He must've purchased the same Reality Distortion Field device that Apple is rumored to use.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't a free speech issues. A) because you're not banned from saying or wearing such things. It's just that companies are essentially required by law to provide a safe and respectable work space. B) obscenity is not protected public speech. There are Supreme Court cases involving this. If it is reasonably considered obscene then the speech is not absolutely protected.
sexism - 1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
We can argue over the second definition, but the first one is clearly inappropriate for the majority of contexts.
Maybe it's the annual sexual harassment training, but that shirt can create a hostile (not as in, someone is going to hurt you) work environment. He only has to wear it once too. It doesn't have to be ongoing or repeated. It could definitely be construed as sexual harassment. You can argue philosophically with that all day; but legally, at least in the US, it would be.
Telling you the game contains sexist attitudes is not telling you it's not appropriate.
Yes it is, in today's society sexism is inappropriate. Therefore, saying that game A is incredibly sexist is telling you that it is incredibly inappropriate.
It's about portraying women with degrading properties, when men are not.
You have not been paying attention to games or any other form of creative media. Every anti-hero in any game is a character given degrading properties. You have ignorant buffoon male characters in numerous games. Take the blinders off please. The only reason you don't recognize it when it comes up is because men can be given any quality and it not be considered some statement about men in real life (e.g. oh he's just a lazy alcoholic, not all men are alcoholics). But if it's a woman, then it somehow morphs into a statement about all women, instead of that one, individual character in the story. You can't have it both ways, if characters in games are a reflection of their labels in real life, then it applies to both sexes.
And while we're on the subject of degrading properties, this is irrelevant to the above point but. Most gamers who had played the older Metroid games, were annoyed to pissed that Samus was neutered to be a dependent know nothing in some of the recent Metroid games.
Do you have a citation on the female gift thing, etc? This is the first I've heard of it.
I give a shit to the people who assume misogyny. Maybe it's my pedantic nature, but displaying sexy women on a shirt at work is at worse sexual harassment, not misogyny.
If it's using the Bechdel test as a basis, it at least implicitly mentions women.
From wikipedia "Bechdel test"
The Bechdel test asks if a work of fiction features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added.
Yes, the correct technical term is "war crime".
Definitions, definitions, definitions. It can't be a war crime if no one ever made it a crime. There was no law or agreed conduct of warfare during WW2 that forbade the usage of atomic weapons. This is opposed to the German's genocide, the Japanese's horrific treatment of prisoners of war, etc.
Are you seriously suggesting that they didn't have any rough idea what it would do?
Knowing what a weapon could do and moral judgements are two different things. Your question is irrelevant. That said, no one knew that the long term effects of the bombs at the time. And you can't judge the initial blast any more really than you can any other country's bombing of cities during the war. In fact, the US' fire bombing campaign claimed more Japanese lives than the two bomb drops did (initially).
It is a basic ethical truth that two wrongs don't make a right.
And at what point did I say that?
Al Qaeda is not a country and therefore can not declare war.
You do know that the federal government recognizes that the Founding Fathers were and could be considered terrorists right?
I'm unsure how the use in wartime would classify as terrorism. Further, how moral judgements of the actions can be made when it was the first usage of such a weapon against an enemy force. Even more so when, Germany and Japan were both attempting to develop the same weaponry for use.
I flubbed the Englishes...
"They got cheaper gas that they weren't entitled to."
They were only supposed to use the gas for business purposes related to their NASA work, but they used it for their own personal use as well. People say "big deal" to this stuff, but it's serious. Those rules are in place so that corruption and nepotism in government contracting is at a minimum.
They got cheaper gas they were entitled to. They didn't get a deal for cheaper gas. They essentially stole cheaper gas.
*whispers* pay no mind to the man behind the mucous curtain...there's no virus making you stupid...yessssssss....
LMAO wow, the point went completely over your head. If you think this: "The Earth is only 400 thousand years old?" is equivalent to suggesting what you say...wow, just wow...Particularly after this, "That's what I thought, but the link [you give] only shows a 400,000 year window."
No the point is, excusing the boshe ice core citation and the bell curve comment (wth does that have to do with anything), we are colder than it has been historically.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w...
You can make your graph look like anything you want it to by selecting your window.
Exactly this, I'm not sure what "ghosts" have to do with this. If I make someone think there's someone behind them, they'll think there's someone behind them.
You wouldn't be able to illuminate anything if the light never goes anywhere?
Important thing to note. Because of the speed those satellites are traveling, they have to make adjustments to their clocks every so often. As they end up being behind by micro-seconds.
My response to someone not liking beer (on taste alone) is they haven't found the right beer. Blue Moon tastes nothing like Stella Artois, etc etc. Some are more bitter, some more hoppy, some have a fruity taste.
Excuse the oversimplification here but....
What I'm getting is, if they take a bunch of particles together in the right combination, then they no longer emit or react to photons? A) huh? B) so invisibility cloak anyone?
And your point?
Now what the morons in MO have done, does nothing to explain any of what happened. Where are the hospital records of the officers injuries, do these dip-shit pigs have in car cameras?
First, no they didn't have cameras, but that's irrelevant, as the shooting and altercation would've happened behind the camera. At most, you'd get audio, which would only corroborate what is already known. Scuffle at car (see Brown's blood in police car and close range gun shot to hand), and some fired shots. You might hear some of the words used during the altercation and that's it.
Second, HIPAA (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa...e/privacyrule/) the hospital records are not going to be released until the trial. That's even if it get's to trial. As the Grand Jury, who surely has the hospital records, is deliberating on whether Wilson will be charged.
The Bush's timetable argument is so full of holes it's pitiful to see someone use it. First, the administration were in negotiations to keep troops there. Malaki didn't want to give US troops immunity so Obama said no deal and didn't renew the treaty. Now second, it could be said that by not pushing Malaki on the immunity was due to his political stance on the issue. But the reasoning probably was, that if he just outright decided to nix renewing the treaty, he'd get hit over the head when ISIS or some other radical group popped up because of early withdrawal, so he feigned renegotiation.
So when in 2012 he was seeking reelection he could say, "I kept my promise to get troops out of Iraq." But when shit hit the fan, like everyone was saying it would, he could say, "I tried to renegotiate a Status of Forces treaty, but the Iraqis didn't want to play ball." And it's been shown to be BS. Given the recent memoir from Panetta.
deficit != debt
That's one of my prime issues with Obama, he never manages to own up to his f-ups. He always finds someone else to blame, or some excuse as to why he screwed up. He must've purchased the same Reality Distortion Field device that Apple is rumored to use.