I live in a no-fault jurisdiction, one of the few where people who are not married have zero claim on each other's assets, except for child support. And those who are divorcing only have a right to "partnership of acquests" - you only divide up what is acquired by the partnership during the marriage.
What's needed are more equitable laws. No-fault is part of it.
So why not get rid of marriage? Then you don't need to even worry about it! There, problem solved.
After all, by your definition, it's just an overly moral stinky leftover from the time of barbarians.
I tell people that marriage is the #1 cause of divorce. Splitting after marriage is harder and more stressful, due to the legal complications, than after cohabiting.
Cohabiting couple - someone cheats, is abusive, whatever - "The door is there, your stuff is on the other side of it. Goodbye." Or alternatively, "I'm out of here. Goodbye"
Married couple - all the above, PLUS lawyers, the court, costs, and because the process is harder, it ends up being more acrimonious.
Then don't cheat! Otherwise, let me introduce you to Divorced Barbie. Divorced Barbie comes with: Ken's Car, Ken's House, Ken's Boat, Ken's Furniture, Ken's Computer, one of Ken's Friends, and a key chain made with Ken's balls.
And she comes with G.I. Joe. She was just faking it with Ken.
But seriously, don't cheat. Or accept that there will be consequences.
Jimmy Carter admitted that there were times when he had looked upon a woman and lusted. It's NORMAL for BOTH sexes.
You get into trouble when you try to "squeeze the Charmin".
Actions count for a lot more than words.
As for the down-mod, making stuff into a "thought-crime" is so old-old-old-skool. Just because Jesus did it doesn't give him or thought-crime any legitimacy; even less in a discussion on cheating. We're adults, and as such accountable to each other for our actions. And to argue that the "thought is the father of the action" is provably false in the vast majority of cases, such as Jimmy Carter.
Besides which, it was also written that Jesus was tempted in all ways like a man. So, for that to be true, he lusted after women. And probably, if he was to be the representative of all people, after men as well.
I've been followed around by a nutjob who was secretly taking pictures of me - I only found out that they had found where I was hiding from them because they showed the pics to another person. I've been cyberstalked to the point that the police got involved and that nutjob lost their job. It happens a lot more often than we think.
Also, I've had women telling me about how they followed their partner/spouse/soon-to-be-ex around to see who they're cheating with, and I've told them they have to get a grip - that's stalking. If it's over, it's over. Clean up any legal details, and move on.
Both sexes seem to kind of "lose it" when one party, for one reason or another, wants out. I can see how, if there's nobody around to add a voice of reason, but instead everyone is egging them on, this becomes a self-reinforcing behavior. Their hurt makes it "justified" to them even when, by any rational standard, it's not the way to move ahead with your life.
Relationships are complicated. Ending them, depending on the parties involved, can be dangerous. Or almost impossible, because the other party is insisting it's not over. I have one relative, she ended the relationship years ago because of his continual cheating. He's still sleeping with a variety of other women, but still following her around whenever he can, showing up in her parking lot at night, leaving roses on her car, then the next day a pile of burnt photos of when they were together, broken a window, texts her like crazy, goes out of his way to drive down her street. It's creepy, and the police are like "we have more important things to do."
Are you looking for a job? Then these will actually be potential problems towards getting hired. People interviewing you who don't have patents will be intimidated. It's like a PhD for a coding job - leave it off, unless you want to seem "too qualified" or "not the right fit".
Yes, old laptops are very portable and low-energy.
Take out the battery from one of those old clunkers (you won't be needing it and it probably doesn't work anyway) and you reduce the weight by a lot, as well as the energy draw.
Remove the old hard drives (they're noisy, generate heat, and consume a - comparatively - lot of electricity), and stick in a 64 gig usb stick for $35.00
Set the screen to go blank after 5 minutes.
So you now have a device that you can actually use to SEE and EDIT what you're storing and sharing. Can't do that with the Eggcyte. And you still need to plug in the eggcyte to recharge it and you need a wifi connection (no, you can't just use a direct ethernet connection) and port forwarding at your router to avoid the whole "use their subdomain service".
Since you can get dual-core laptops for free nowadays, your total outlay is $35.00, as opposed to $200 and a 9-month wait. And your old laptop, you can always upgrade the storage by either plugging in another usb or flash card (or even buying a cheap internal or external hard drive). Get a terabyte of storage for less than half of what they're asking for 64gig. And you'll almost certainly have more than 1 gig of ram.
Notice that you can reserve your sub-domain for only $9. Whoopdee doo ding dong! Now, is that per year, forever, or what, they don't say. And when you go to the demo link, it's "currently offline".
You see, the cloud services companies take advantage of the fact that most of us don’t know how to buy a domain, set up a website and program it to do what we want. So, what choice do we have but to click the "Accept" button when they show us the license agreement to use their service.
So instead you want us to buy a subdomain and tied hardware from you, hardware that isn't upgradeable. I can use an old laptop and get a much better screen, much more storage, much better performance, and a wider choice of software. And unlike Tizen, where "the entire SDK has been published under a non-open-source Samsung license", which you can read . Some exerpts:
IMPORTANT NOTE: This license is primarily applicable to several proprietary components, which are not open sourced. If applicable, the Open Source Software license shall take precedence over the rights and restrictions granted in this Agreement, but solely with respect to such Open Source Software.
... and...
3.1 Except for the limited license granted to You herein, You agree that all right, title and interest in and to the Tizen SDK including the concepts and technology inherent in them, Samsung or Tizen trademarks, copyrights, patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights, are, and at all times shall remain, the sole and exclusive property of Samsung. Except to the extent permitted under this Agreement or by applicable law, You shall not (i) modify, reverse engineer or disassemble any portion of the Tizen SDK; (ii) lease, rent, copy, redistribute or sublicense the Tizen SDK to third party; or (iii) remove, efface or obscure any copyright notices, logos or other proprietary notices or legends included in the Tizen SDK. You may not use any component part of the Tizen SDK in any way independent from the Tizen SDK. You may not load or install any of the Tizen SDK onto mobile phones or any other devices, except a personal computer.
... and...
8.1 You acknowledge and agree that the Tizen SDK was developed at considerable time and expense by Samsung and contains valuable trade secrets and confidential information of Samsung. Accordingly, You agree to maintain the Tizen SDK in confidence and except as expressly provided in Section 2, You (i) will not disclose or provide access thereto to any person, or (ii) use the Tizen SDK for any purpose not expressly authorized hereby, or permit or authorize any other person to do so.
No-fault is an option, not mandatory, as it is here.
Also, I guess you forgot about the Roxanne and Herbert Pulitzer divorce, that set the style for these sort of "let's get the dirty laundry out" celebrity divorces, such as Britney Speares in 2007, and everyone now airing all the dirty laundry on facebook.
Well, the story is about spying on cheaters, so I was taking your comments within that context. I'm sorry that I mis-read it.
But how do you expect someone's "feelings of affection" NOT to wane when they find out they've been cheated on. Or worse, forgiven it and had it happen to them again? Once, I can try to understand, love conquers all, etc... but twice, the relationship's as dead as if you had nuked it from orbit using sharks with lasers attached to their heads.
In such cases, the aggrieved party has to come to terms with the fact that they made a mistake entering into the relationship in the first place. Otherwise, vile bitterness can consume them forever, and we've all run into people who can neither forgive nor forget, because it (being cheated on) really does hurt right to the core, and I guess it's easier to stay angry than to say "this was a mistake on both sides."
Take the old laptop, remove the hard drives and battery, stick in a bootable usb stick or memory card running your favorite distro, and you have a very quiet, low-energy server for all your needs.
Of course spying has a lot to do with jealousy and gaining the upper hand in court. And that's what you are saying when you sum up my statements as "You were basically saying that the technical criminality of adultery had a material impact on the need for people to spy on each other."
Divorce courts are noted for threats to air the dirty laundry and other forms of blackmail. We know this because on occasion the other side doesn't cave and all the stuff leaks out into the tabloids. "Revenge divorce" anyone?
Heck, just watch Judge Judy, Dr. Phil, or any of the other pop shows that deal with couples whose relationships are train wrecks, and watch the emails, the voicemails, the stalking, the threats of violence , the internet histories, the accounts on dating and pr0n sites... anything to discredit the other party.
There would be a LOT less of this if you simply enacted no-fault divorce. The only grounds for a divorce are the desire of one party to end the marriage. No reason need be given, the judge doesn't want to hear it because it's simply irrelevant under no-fault.
That sounds great and all... but court decisions that bankrupt companies result in pretty much the same thing every time. The company goes bankrupt and, at best, the lawyers get paid. Then the company reopens with all the same people that made the decision in charge but under new ownership and the debt gets written off. The old owners would be all those same employees that had their retirement in stock which is now worthless. The people in charge are long retired and don't care.
The plaintiffs can afford to pay 10x what the original judgment was ($324.5 million), and they'd STILL be way ahead financially because even $50k a head doesn't account for the years of depressed wages that this had on everyone in the tech sector for years. Or do you believe that, between them, Google, Apple, Adobe and Intel can't scrape up less than $5 billion without going bankrupt?
Successful marriage requires commitment to, and sacrifice for, the other person.
It's a two-way street, and cheating is a symptom of a lack of commitment. To argue that the one cheated on should be obliged to sacrifice their own integrity by continuing in such a relationship creates a very unequal and unfair "partnership."
If a person quits a marriage (by divorce or cheating) any time his/her feelings of affection wane, then not only are they being immature and selfish, but they're also missing out on the joys of a life-long love story.
How is it selfish or immature to say "you broke the rules, there are consequences?" Seems to me that the one being selfish and immature is the one who wants to keep someone in such a relationship "because." Adults know that there are consequences for their acts - it's immature children who say "if you really loved me you'd stay with me." Sounds a lot like a 10-year-old whining about how they should have their own cell phone "because if you really loved me you'd give me a cell phone."
There's a HUGE difference between a "dry spell" and cheating. Cheating is a breech of trust at such an elemental level that it cannot help but call the relationship into question. When you're caught stealing, you can make restitution. There is simply no way that anyone can make restitution for cheating. What are you going to do - offer a "hall pass" to the aggrieved party? That certainly won't restore trust. Al that gets you is a "You don't really know me at all, do you?"
It's still on the books in several states. We have this TV show about Canada Border Services, and one American who wanted to come into Canada was red-flagged because he had a criminal record for adultery. After verifying, since there is no equivalent crime in Canada, he was allowed in.
Most countries that criminalize adultery are those where the dominant religion is Islam, and several Sub-Saharan African Christian-majority countries, but there are some notable exceptions to this rule, namely Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, and 21 States in the United States.
and
As of 2014, adultery remains a criminal offense in 21 states, although prosecutions are rare. Massachusetts, Idaho, Oklahoma, Michigan, and Wisconsin consider adultery a felony, while in the other states it is a misdemeanor. It is a Class B misdemeanor in New York and Utah, and a Class I felony in Wisconsin.Penalties vary from a $10 fine (Maryland) to life sentence (Michigan). In South Carolina, the fine for adultery is up to $500 and/or imprisonment for no more than one year [South Carolina code 16-15-60], and South Carolina divorce laws deny alimony to the adulterous spouse.
The book did not claim any percentages, just generally observed that most girls didn't care for the activity.
And that "observation" was clearly wrong. It wasn't an observation because anyone observing would have seen that the D&D contingent was miniscule in terms of overall gaming at the time. It employs the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. "No true gamer would play Monopoly or Risk." And yet tens of millions, of both sexes, did every year.
That's only because marriage rates are on the decline. In terms of percentages of marriages that end in divorce, it's as high as ever.
Marriage is the #1 cause of divorce.
Studies such as this one report a higher level of feelings of commitment between recently married couples than those cohabitating for a long period, which just goes to show that marriage tends to give people a false sense of commitment, given the high divorce rate. Feelings change.
Not being married makes it much easier to kick the cheat (of either sex) to the curb. There's no "OMG the marriage is over."
Of course, if you had civilized laws that didn't make adultery a criminal offense (it's not in Canada; the only grounds for divorce where I live are the desire of one of the parties to exit the relationship) you wouldn't have so much need for people spying on each other. It's bad enough when facebook and google and the government do it.
I wonder if the spin would have been different if it were Google and Canonical announcing this? Nah, surely not. Slashdot isn't partisan in the slightest.
If it were Canonical there's be a royal turd-storm over how long this latest initiative will last before they can it, same as so many other products in the past.
And if it were google, with that same last line about allowing women to be more productive, it would be the same reaction, because it's stupid as all heck.
So, if you leave the company or are terminated, will they continue to hold these eggs for you until you want them at no charge? Will they pay for the implanting and provide maternity benefits even though you're no longer an employee - which they would have had to do if you had chosen to get preggy while you were working for them?
"Oh, sorry, you're over 40, but we terminated you because "your skills are now outdated." Thanks for saving us a lot more than if you had decided to have a child earlier on, sucker. And good luck trying to find and keep a job as a 40-something pregnant woman with "outdated skills."
Allowing women to have "a more productive life?" Only if you mistake your career as "your life."
Given the cultural context where most would have said it's not a fit hobby for any girl this is downright forward thinking.
Games? Not a fit hobby for girls? Both sexes were into games such as Monopoly (1933) and Risk (1950's) well before D&D existed. To claim that women became gamers through D&D would require you to use a very, very limited definition of Gamer - one that presupposes that the only Gamers were those that played D&D, an almost insignificant fraction of the gamer population at the time.
Even today the vast majority of little girls don't tend to play soldiers, regardless of what their parents do or don't buy them.
The vast majority of kids of both sexes don't "play soldiers". Go look on the shelves of the toy section... you can't buy what isn't stocked.
It seems the truth isn't politically correct enough for some people.
The root problem is that the article starts with an inaccurate supposition - that D&D was the beginning of gamers. It wasn't. And picking sexist quotes to "back up" that erroneous perception is just sloppy.
1. That implies that programming and video games are "mens stuff" (sic), which is clearly not true.
That was my point. It's like claiming that D&D introduced women to gaming, when the facts say otherwise. Risk and Monopoly have all the competitive elements, we all played them as kids, and some of those games took a whole afternoon. About the only way to argue against this fact is to claim that only people playing D&D are "true gamers." The article is simply factually inaccurate by assuming there were no "gamers" before D&D.
Slashdot Mirror
The division of property is a separate issue.
I live in a no-fault jurisdiction, one of the few where people who are not married have zero claim on each other's assets, except for child support. And those who are divorcing only have a right to "partnership of acquests" - you only divide up what is acquired by the partnership during the marriage.
What's needed are more equitable laws. No-fault is part of it.
So why not get rid of marriage? Then you don't need to even worry about it! There, problem solved.
After all, by your definition, it's just an overly moral stinky leftover from the time of barbarians.
I tell people that marriage is the #1 cause of divorce. Splitting after marriage is harder and more stressful, due to the legal complications, than after cohabiting.
Cohabiting couple - someone cheats, is abusive, whatever - "The door is there, your stuff is on the other side of it. Goodbye." Or alternatively, "I'm out of here. Goodbye"
Married couple - all the above, PLUS lawyers, the court, costs, and because the process is harder, it ends up being more acrimonious.
As a man, you'll be paying through the nose.
Then don't cheat! Otherwise, let me introduce you to Divorced Barbie. Divorced Barbie comes with: Ken's Car, Ken's House, Ken's Boat, Ken's Furniture, Ken's Computer, one of Ken's Friends, and a key chain made with Ken's balls.
And she comes with G.I. Joe. She was just faking it with Ken.
But seriously, don't cheat. Or accept that there will be consequences.
Jimmy Carter admitted that there were times when he had looked upon a woman and lusted. It's NORMAL for BOTH sexes.
You get into trouble when you try to "squeeze the Charmin".
Actions count for a lot more than words.
As for the down-mod, making stuff into a "thought-crime" is so old-old-old-skool. Just because Jesus did it doesn't give him or thought-crime any legitimacy; even less in a discussion on cheating. We're adults, and as such accountable to each other for our actions. And to argue that the "thought is the father of the action" is provably false in the vast majority of cases, such as Jimmy Carter.
Besides which, it was also written that Jesus was tempted in all ways like a man. So, for that to be true, he lusted after women. And probably, if he was to be the representative of all people, after men as well.
I've been followed around by a nutjob who was secretly taking pictures of me - I only found out that they had found where I was hiding from them because they showed the pics to another person. I've been cyberstalked to the point that the police got involved and that nutjob lost their job. It happens a lot more often than we think.
Also, I've had women telling me about how they followed their partner/spouse/soon-to-be-ex around to see who they're cheating with, and I've told them they have to get a grip - that's stalking. If it's over, it's over. Clean up any legal details, and move on.
Both sexes seem to kind of "lose it" when one party, for one reason or another, wants out. I can see how, if there's nobody around to add a voice of reason, but instead everyone is egging them on, this becomes a self-reinforcing behavior. Their hurt makes it "justified" to them even when, by any rational standard, it's not the way to move ahead with your life.
Relationships are complicated. Ending them, depending on the parties involved, can be dangerous. Or almost impossible, because the other party is insisting it's not over. I have one relative, she ended the relationship years ago because of his continual cheating. He's still sleeping with a variety of other women, but still following her around whenever he can, showing up in her parking lot at night, leaving roses on her car, then the next day a pile of burnt photos of when they were together, broken a window, texts her like crazy, goes out of his way to drive down her street. It's creepy, and the police are like "we have more important things to do."
Are you looking for a job? Then these will actually be potential problems towards getting hired. People interviewing you who don't have patents will be intimidated. It's like a PhD for a coding job - leave it off, unless you want to seem "too qualified" or "not the right fit".
Yes, old laptops are very portable and low-energy.
Take out the battery from one of those old clunkers (you won't be needing it and it probably doesn't work anyway) and you reduce the weight by a lot, as well as the energy draw.
Remove the old hard drives (they're noisy, generate heat, and consume a - comparatively - lot of electricity), and stick in a 64 gig usb stick for $35.00
Set the screen to go blank after 5 minutes.
So you now have a device that you can actually use to SEE and EDIT what you're storing and sharing. Can't do that with the Eggcyte. And you still need to plug in the eggcyte to recharge it and you need a wifi connection (no, you can't just use a direct ethernet connection) and port forwarding at your router to avoid the whole "use their subdomain service".
Since you can get dual-core laptops for free nowadays, your total outlay is $35.00, as opposed to $200 and a 9-month wait. And your old laptop, you can always upgrade the storage by either plugging in another usb or flash card (or even buying a cheap internal or external hard drive). Get a terabyte of storage for less than half of what they're asking for 64gig. And you'll almost certainly have more than 1 gig of ram.
old laptops didn't have USB port :)
Of course they do. Ancient laptops might not, but they're so old you can't give them away.
You see, the cloud services companies take advantage of the fact that most of us don’t know how to buy a domain, set up a website and program it to do what we want. So, what choice do we have but to click the "Accept" button when they show us the license agreement to use their service.
So instead you want us to buy a subdomain and tied hardware from you, hardware that isn't upgradeable. I can use an old laptop and get a much better screen, much more storage, much better performance, and a wider choice of software. And unlike Tizen, where "the entire SDK has been published under a non-open-source Samsung license", which you can read . Some exerpts:
IMPORTANT NOTE: This license is primarily applicable to several proprietary components, which are not open sourced. If applicable, the Open Source Software license shall take precedence over the rights and restrictions granted in this Agreement, but solely with respect to such Open Source Software.
... and ...
3.1 Except for the limited license granted to You herein, You agree that all right, title and interest in and to the Tizen SDK including the concepts and technology inherent in them, Samsung or Tizen trademarks, copyrights, patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights, are, and at all times shall remain, the sole and exclusive property of Samsung. Except to the extent permitted under this Agreement or by applicable law, You shall not (i) modify, reverse engineer or disassemble any portion of the Tizen SDK; (ii) lease, rent, copy, redistribute or sublicense the Tizen SDK to third party; or (iii) remove, efface or obscure any copyright notices, logos or other proprietary notices or legends included in the Tizen SDK. You may not use any component part of the Tizen SDK in any way independent from the Tizen SDK. You may not load or install any of the Tizen SDK onto mobile phones or any other devices, except a personal computer.
... and ...
8.1 You acknowledge and agree that the Tizen SDK was developed at considerable time and expense by Samsung and contains valuable trade secrets and confidential information of Samsung. Accordingly, You agree to maintain the Tizen SDK in confidence and except as expressly provided in Section 2, You (i) will not disclose or provide access thereto to any person, or (ii) use the Tizen SDK for any purpose not expressly authorized hereby, or permit or authorize any other person to do so.
Also, I guess you forgot about the Roxanne and Herbert Pulitzer divorce, that set the style for these sort of "let's get the dirty laundry out" celebrity divorces, such as Britney Speares in 2007, and everyone now airing all the dirty laundry on facebook.
Well, the story is about spying on cheaters, so I was taking your comments within that context. I'm sorry that I mis-read it.
But how do you expect someone's "feelings of affection" NOT to wane when they find out they've been cheated on. Or worse, forgiven it and had it happen to them again? Once, I can try to understand, love conquers all, etc... but twice, the relationship's as dead as if you had nuked it from orbit using sharks with lasers attached to their heads.
In such cases, the aggrieved party has to come to terms with the fact that they made a mistake entering into the relationship in the first place. Otherwise, vile bitterness can consume them forever, and we've all run into people who can neither forgive nor forget, because it (being cheated on) really does hurt right to the core, and I guess it's easier to stay angry than to say "this was a mistake on both sides."
Take the old laptop, remove the hard drives and battery, stick in a bootable usb stick or memory card running your favorite distro, and you have a very quiet, low-energy server for all your needs.
Of course spying has a lot to do with jealousy and gaining the upper hand in court. And that's what you are saying when you sum up my statements as "You were basically saying that the technical criminality of adultery had a material impact on the need for people to spy on each other."
Divorce courts are noted for threats to air the dirty laundry and other forms of blackmail. We know this because on occasion the other side doesn't cave and all the stuff leaks out into the tabloids. "Revenge divorce" anyone?
Heck, just watch Judge Judy, Dr. Phil, or any of the other pop shows that deal with couples whose relationships are train wrecks, and watch the emails, the voicemails, the stalking, the threats of violence , the internet histories, the accounts on dating and pr0n sites... anything to discredit the other party.
There would be a LOT less of this if you simply enacted no-fault divorce. The only grounds for a divorce are the desire of one party to end the marriage. No reason need be given, the judge doesn't want to hear it because it's simply irrelevant under no-fault.
That sounds great and all... but court decisions that bankrupt companies result in pretty much the same thing every time. The company goes bankrupt and, at best, the lawyers get paid. Then the company reopens with all the same people that made the decision in charge but under new ownership and the debt gets written off. The old owners would be all those same employees that had their retirement in stock which is now worthless. The people in charge are long retired and don't care.
The plaintiffs can afford to pay 10x what the original judgment was ($324.5 million), and they'd STILL be way ahead financially because even $50k a head doesn't account for the years of depressed wages that this had on everyone in the tech sector for years. Or do you believe that, between them, Google, Apple, Adobe and Intel can't scrape up less than $5 billion without going bankrupt?
Successful marriage requires commitment to, and sacrifice for, the other person.
It's a two-way street, and cheating is a symptom of a lack of commitment. To argue that the one cheated on should be obliged to sacrifice their own integrity by continuing in such a relationship creates a very unequal and unfair "partnership."
If a person quits a marriage (by divorce or cheating) any time his/her feelings of affection wane, then not only are they being immature and selfish, but they're also missing out on the joys of a life-long love story.
How is it selfish or immature to say "you broke the rules, there are consequences?" Seems to me that the one being selfish and immature is the one who wants to keep someone in such a relationship "because." Adults know that there are consequences for their acts - it's immature children who say "if you really loved me you'd stay with me." Sounds a lot like a 10-year-old whining about how they should have their own cell phone "because if you really loved me you'd give me a cell phone."
There's a HUGE difference between a "dry spell" and cheating. Cheating is a breech of trust at such an elemental level that it cannot help but call the relationship into question. When you're caught stealing, you can make restitution. There is simply no way that anyone can make restitution for cheating. What are you going to do - offer a "hall pass" to the aggrieved party? That certainly won't restore trust. Al that gets you is a "You don't really know me at all, do you?"
21 states still consider adultery a criminal offense
Most countries that criminalize adultery are those where the dominant religion is Islam, and several Sub-Saharan African Christian-majority countries, but there are some notable exceptions to this rule, namely Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, and 21 States in the United States.
and
As of 2014, adultery remains a criminal offense in 21 states, although prosecutions are rare. Massachusetts, Idaho, Oklahoma, Michigan, and Wisconsin consider adultery a felony, while in the other states it is a misdemeanor. It is a Class B misdemeanor in New York and Utah, and a Class I felony in Wisconsin.Penalties vary from a $10 fine (Maryland) to life sentence (Michigan). In South Carolina, the fine for adultery is up to $500 and/or imprisonment for no more than one year [South Carolina code 16-15-60], and South Carolina divorce laws deny alimony to the adulterous spouse.
Kind of backward, is it not?
The book did not claim any percentages, just generally observed that most girls didn't care for the activity.
And that "observation" was clearly wrong. It wasn't an observation because anyone observing would have seen that the D&D contingent was miniscule in terms of overall gaming at the time. It employs the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. "No true gamer would play Monopoly or Risk." And yet tens of millions, of both sexes, did every year.
"Get the smeg hammer!" Great show.
And the term "Good" lawyer is an oxymoron.
It's a given that any lawyer is going to f*** you. A good one is one who will f*** the other side more.
Sure,while we're at it, let's go back to stupidity like "Tie a rock to the witch and throw her in the water. If she drowns, she wasn't a witch."
That's only because marriage rates are on the decline. In terms of percentages of marriages that end in divorce, it's as high as ever.
Marriage is the #1 cause of divorce.
Studies such as this one report a higher level of feelings of commitment between recently married couples than those cohabitating for a long period, which just goes to show that marriage tends to give people a false sense of commitment, given the high divorce rate. Feelings change.
Not being married makes it much easier to kick the cheat (of either sex) to the curb. There's no "OMG the marriage is over."
Of course, if you had civilized laws that didn't make adultery a criminal offense (it's not in Canada; the only grounds for divorce where I live are the desire of one of the parties to exit the relationship) you wouldn't have so much need for people spying on each other. It's bad enough when facebook and google and the government do it.
I wonder if the spin would have been different if it were Google and Canonical announcing this? Nah, surely not. Slashdot isn't partisan in the slightest.
If it were Canonical there's be a royal turd-storm over how long this latest initiative will last before they can it, same as so many other products in the past.
And if it were google, with that same last line about allowing women to be more productive, it would be the same reaction, because it's stupid as all heck.
So, if you leave the company or are terminated, will they continue to hold these eggs for you until you want them at no charge? Will they pay for the implanting and provide maternity benefits even though you're no longer an employee - which they would have had to do if you had chosen to get preggy while you were working for them?
"Oh, sorry, you're over 40, but we terminated you because "your skills are now outdated." Thanks for saving us a lot more than if you had decided to have a child earlier on, sucker. And good luck trying to find and keep a job as a 40-something pregnant woman with "outdated skills."
Allowing women to have "a more productive life?" Only if you mistake your career as "your life."
Given the cultural context where most would have said it's not a fit hobby for any girl this is downright forward thinking.
Games? Not a fit hobby for girls? Both sexes were into games such as Monopoly (1933) and Risk (1950's) well before D&D existed. To claim that women became gamers through D&D would require you to use a very, very limited definition of Gamer - one that presupposes that the only Gamers were those that played D&D, an almost insignificant fraction of the gamer population at the time.
Even today the vast majority of little girls don't tend to play soldiers, regardless of what their parents do or don't buy them.
The vast majority of kids of both sexes don't "play soldiers". Go look on the shelves of the toy section ... you can't buy what isn't stocked.
It seems the truth isn't politically correct enough for some people.
The root problem is that the article starts with an inaccurate supposition - that D&D was the beginning of gamers. It wasn't. And picking sexist quotes to "back up" that erroneous perception is just sloppy.
1. That implies that programming and video games are "mens stuff" (sic), which is clearly not true.
That was my point. It's like claiming that D&D introduced women to gaming, when the facts say otherwise. Risk and Monopoly have all the competitive elements, we all played them as kids, and some of those games took a whole afternoon. About the only way to argue against this fact is to claim that only people playing D&D are "true gamers." The article is simply factually inaccurate by assuming there were no "gamers" before D&D.