Old people have been complaining about kids since we had old people and kids. News at 11.
I'm definitely way over on the left and liberal, but am stunned that parents universally no longer punish their children *at all* (can't scar the kids now, can we?). Nor do schools (wouldn't want a lawsuit). No no no - you have to *encourage* them to behave appropriately
As opposed to the good old days, where children were to be seen and not heard, and you were free to take a whip to your kids at any time for any reason.
The same behavior by a man is seen as being confident, tough, and forthright. Of course all male bosses aren't universally loved. My point was that if you had the same set of behaviour, but changed the gender, there are different views of that behavior.:P
And my point is that this chestnut had a heart of worthless crap in it. Sorry. It's based on some woman at the office getting called a bitch, and the ensuing rationalizations that it's a result of the sexist patriarchy. But when male bosses are called a dick, prick or asshole...it's because he's a dick, prick or asshole.
"Why should I pay so much for an average American when I can get a much more productive and smarter Indian for half the price."
Funny how that only applies to those on the bottom but not those at the top. When was the last time you heard of a CEO being fired and replaced with an Indian with an MBA from Harvard?
Not only that, but women have more of the innate ability to regulate and juggle all the things necessary for keeping a kid (or two, or three) fed, occupied, out of trouble, at school or sports practice or wherever, as well as the tons of other things she's got to do to keep the home life and kids' extracurricular activities going.
Unfortunately the facts don't back up that maternal superiority complex. Statistics are clear, if it's a choice between being raised by a father or raised by a mother - kids are better off with the father. Teen pregnancy, drop out rates, drug use - are all higher with single moms than with single dads.
What you describe is nothing more than the reality of one parent staying at home while the other works. What would change if the dad stayed home while the mom went to work? Nothing.
No, what don't YOU get? The point is women who want the top career AND spend a huge amount of time at home with the kids. Pick one, you can't have both.
Statistically children are much better off with single parent fathers than with single parent mothers.
My wife is simply better than me at taking care of kids.
Don't forget the maternal chauvinism aspect. If a new mom doesn't know something or makes a mistake, it's because she's new, or tired, or overworked, or just human.
Whereas if a father doesn't know something or makes a mistake, it's because he's utterly incompetent at raising a child.
Back when the movement started, the issue was obtaining equality before the law. That's been achieved
Except that it has not been achieved. Men have to register for the draft as a condition for getting student loans or applying for government jobs. Women do not. This is why feminism needs to die and be replaced with egalitarianism: because feminists have never pushed for equal responsibilities to go along with those equal rights.
Sure he did. The problem for feminists is that they want to have their cake (be the primary caregiver) and eat it too (have the great career that comes with 70 hour work weeks).
but is chiefly the vestige of a medieval academic system
Which, like lifetime appointments for judges, are done to insulate professors from political concerns. Sort of like that old quote about Democracy - it's the worst form of government, except for all the others.
Many tenured professors put in fewer hours than their part-time TAs. Ironically, true reform is anathema to this privileged liberal elite
Yawn. Funny how wingnuts don't have the same concern when it comes to worker/CEO pay.
Now, lets take a look at some very real issues that face women and men. (I suppose it shouldn't be feminism but gender rights then). Women in leadership positions, if they are strict, like common male leaders, are viewed as frigid bitches. If they show even a bit of a soft side, then they are viewed as wishy-washy.
As opposed to male bosses, who are universally loved. Every single one of them. No male boss is hated at work, and none has ever been called a dick, prick, or asshole.
Puleeze. If you want to be the new feminism, stop recycling the old talking points that never had any basis in reality.
We don't let boys wear pink, and we don't let the girls wear masculine clothes until later in her life.
It's so people don't constantly mistake them for being members of the opposite sex until they hit puberty and start developing secondary sexual characteristics. Duh.
Mothers can take the same amount of parental leave as fathers when the baby is born. After that, they can both go back to work if they want to get that promotion, earn that raise, etc.
Not in the slightest. Feminists want equal pay without making equal sacrifices. Remember that "women make 76 cents for every dollar a man makes" canard? It's based on an hour-per-hour comparison only - ignoring the fact that men put in the majority of overtime, have more experience, and suffer over 90% of workplace deaths and injuries.
Take Xerox for example. When the company was in a tough spot, the CEO didn't have a weekend off for over a year. The CEO was a woman.
The above opinion was deemed sexist enough for the person holding it to resign as Harvard's President in 2005.
Who, coincidentally, is now on Obama's economic team. But if the president was Lauren Sommers and made a similar observation on men also having the lowest IQ's and largest number of mental disabilities, if she would have been driven from office as well.
$30K or $5 "already paid" to a company offering a product for sale that you've stolen, doesn't matter. Stealing is stealing.
Boy it sure was a shame when drove over the speed limit the other day, committing arson. Or that pyro who set an apartment building on fire last year, committing larceny. What's that? You mean we actually have different terms for violating the law in different ways, even though they all involve property?
So feel free to stop lying at any time. Copyright infringement is not theft, never has been theft, never will be theft.
If you think I'm on my "high horse" because I don't steal from Apple -- that's fine with me. Also not my fault if you're defensive about your inappropriate and illegal behavior. Otherwise, why did you bother replying?
I'm not defensive, I just have a low tolerance for tools and fools. I JUST BOUGHT A FUCKING LAPTOP FROM THEM. You think Apple is going to lose any sleep over not getting an extra $79 (for something that should have been WITH the machine) when they've gotten:
Apple ][e Appleworks Mac SE Quadra 660AV System 7.5 System 8 Clarisworks Appleworks Powerbook 1400 iMac rev A G4 tower OS X Sever original iLife iBook G5 tower Macbook Macbook Pro 10 gig iPod 15 gig iPod 20 gig iPod 30 gig iPod iPod shuffle iPod Mini 160 gig iPod iPod Nano various iPod accessories
As you can see, I've just taken advantage of poor Apple! If everyone were like me Apple would surely be driven out of business! Don't tell Steve, his health is fragile and he might not be able to handle it!!!
There is NOTHING inherently anti-science in faith.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you think water is dry and day is night. Science is based on observation, testing and reason. Faith is based on...faith.
In fact, many claiming science are as dogmatic about their "faith" as the Jesus Freaks are. Al Gore for one.
I wonder if fucktards badgered Magellan's crew for being "round Earth fanatics". This criticism of Gore has nothing to with science and everything to do with wingnut idealogs keeping their heads in the sand.
Meanwhile I'm marked as "troll" for pointing out the fact that under secular progressive educational system run by left wing agenda people are failing miserably at creating literate people who can think critically.
Which left wingers, exactly. You sound like one of those people who needs to see a nice proctologist in North Korea for his persistent anal obstruction. Once he's done removing your head from your ass, you can take a good look around and see what "left wing" actually looks like.
Nixon start the EPA and IIRC had a top marginal tax rate of 70% while he was president. If Glenn Beck thinks Obama is a communist, I wonder how he would categorize Nixon's economic policies.
"Businessmen" and "Wealthy people" tend to get to those places by doing what works, constructively, which is more often than not tied to some sort of science or at least intellectual pursuit.
Or because of the connections they formed in church or in their college frat. The recent economic crash has proved that a whole lot of people took a whole lot of money not because of what they knew, but because of who they knew.
I don't find it surprising that you're proving his point out misdirection, by pedantically focusing on an old, partial definition of "liberalism" instead of people who are called liberals today.
I can sea why you'ld get you're panties in an bunch over such a trivial things. Its happened far to often irregardless of putting food on our families alot.
Rather than solving the source of the problem (kids being bored out of their minds with a shitty curriculum that covers the same topics in 10th grade that it did in 2nd grade), fucktard sadist wingnuts would prefer to dig out the paddle instead.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case I'd like the next version to be named iRony, just for you.
Old people have been complaining about kids since we had old people and kids. News at 11.
I'm definitely way over on the left and liberal, but am stunned that parents universally no longer punish their children *at all* (can't scar the kids now, can we?). Nor do schools (wouldn't want a lawsuit). No no no - you have to *encourage* them to behave appropriately
As opposed to the good old days, where children were to be seen and not heard, and you were free to take a whip to your kids at any time for any reason.
Almost all the Acceptable User Policies contain explicit language about abusive users.
No such animal. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. There's only people who are using the connections they paid for.
The same behavior by a man is seen as being confident, tough, and forthright. Of course all male bosses aren't universally loved. My point was that if you had the same set of behaviour, but changed the gender, there are different views of that behavior. :P
And my point is that this chestnut had a heart of worthless crap in it. Sorry. It's based on some woman at the office getting called a bitch, and the ensuing rationalizations that it's a result of the sexist patriarchy. But when male bosses are called a dick, prick or asshole...it's because he's a dick, prick or asshole.
You might have a great argument if your observation "wanting less white people in Europe" wasn't a total straw man.
"Why should I pay so much for an average American when I can get a much more productive and smarter Indian for half the price."
Funny how that only applies to those on the bottom but not those at the top. When was the last time you heard of a CEO being fired and replaced with an Indian with an MBA from Harvard?
Not only that, but women have more of the innate ability to regulate and juggle all the things necessary for keeping a kid (or two, or three) fed, occupied, out of trouble, at school or sports practice or wherever, as well as the tons of other things she's got to do to keep the home life and kids' extracurricular activities going.
Unfortunately the facts don't back up that maternal superiority complex. Statistics are clear, if it's a choice between being raised by a father or raised by a mother - kids are better off with the father. Teen pregnancy, drop out rates, drug use - are all higher with single moms than with single dads.
What you describe is nothing more than the reality of one parent staying at home while the other works. What would change if the dad stayed home while the mom went to work? Nothing.
No, what don't YOU get? The point is women who want the top career AND spend a huge amount of time at home with the kids. Pick one, you can't have both.
Statistically children are much better off with single parent fathers than with single parent mothers.
My wife is simply better than me at taking care of kids.
Don't forget the maternal chauvinism aspect. If a new mom doesn't know something or makes a mistake, it's because she's new, or tired, or overworked, or just human.
Whereas if a father doesn't know something or makes a mistake, it's because he's utterly incompetent at raising a child.
and better than some women who hate children (yes they do exist).
No kidding. Most child abuse and child murder is committed by mothers, not fathers.
Back when the movement started, the issue was obtaining equality before the law. That's been achieved
Except that it has not been achieved. Men have to register for the draft as a condition for getting student loans or applying for government jobs. Women do not. This is why feminism needs to die and be replaced with egalitarianism: because feminists have never pushed for equal responsibilities to go along with those equal rights.
You haven't articulated your argument fully.
Sure he did. The problem for feminists is that they want to have their cake (be the primary caregiver) and eat it too (have the great career that comes with 70 hour work weeks).
but is chiefly the vestige of a medieval academic system
Which, like lifetime appointments for judges, are done to insulate professors from political concerns. Sort of like that old quote about Democracy - it's the worst form of government, except for all the others.
Many tenured professors put in fewer hours than their part-time TAs. Ironically, true reform is anathema to this privileged liberal elite
Yawn. Funny how wingnuts don't have the same concern when it comes to worker/CEO pay.
Now, lets take a look at some very real issues that face women and men. (I suppose it shouldn't be feminism but gender rights then). Women in leadership positions, if they are strict, like common male leaders, are viewed as frigid bitches. If they show even a bit of a soft side, then they are viewed as wishy-washy.
As opposed to male bosses, who are universally loved. Every single one of them. No male boss is hated at work, and none has ever been called a dick, prick, or asshole.
Puleeze. If you want to be the new feminism, stop recycling the old talking points that never had any basis in reality.
We don't let boys wear pink, and we don't let the girls wear masculine clothes until later in her life.
It's so people don't constantly mistake them for being members of the opposite sex until they hit puberty and start developing secondary sexual characteristics. Duh.
Mothers can take the same amount of parental leave as fathers when the baby is born. After that, they can both go back to work if they want to get that promotion, earn that raise, etc.
Not in the slightest. Feminists want equal pay without making equal sacrifices. Remember that "women make 76 cents for every dollar a man makes" canard? It's based on an hour-per-hour comparison only - ignoring the fact that men put in the majority of overtime, have more experience, and suffer over 90% of workplace deaths and injuries.
Take Xerox for example. When the company was in a tough spot, the CEO didn't have a weekend off for over a year. The CEO was a woman.
The above opinion was deemed sexist enough for the person holding it to resign as Harvard's President in 2005.
Who, coincidentally, is now on Obama's economic team. But if the president was Lauren Sommers and made a similar observation on men also having the lowest IQ's and largest number of mental disabilities, if she would have been driven from office as well.
$30K or $5 "already paid" to a company offering a product for sale that you've stolen, doesn't matter. Stealing is stealing.
Boy it sure was a shame when drove over the speed limit the other day, committing arson. Or that pyro who set an apartment building on fire last year, committing larceny. What's that? You mean we actually have different terms for violating the law in different ways, even though they all involve property?
So feel free to stop lying at any time. Copyright infringement is not theft, never has been theft, never will be theft.
If you think I'm on my "high horse" because I don't steal from Apple -- that's fine with me. Also not my fault if you're defensive about your inappropriate and illegal behavior. Otherwise, why did you bother replying?
I'm not defensive, I just have a low tolerance for tools and fools. I JUST BOUGHT A FUCKING LAPTOP FROM THEM. You think Apple is going to lose any sleep over not getting an extra $79 (for something that should have been WITH the machine) when they've gotten:
Apple ][e
Appleworks
Mac SE
Quadra 660AV
System 7.5
System 8
Clarisworks
Appleworks
Powerbook 1400
iMac rev A
G4 tower
OS X Sever
original iLife
iBook
G5 tower
Macbook
Macbook Pro
10 gig iPod
15 gig iPod
20 gig iPod
30 gig iPod
iPod shuffle
iPod Mini
160 gig iPod
iPod Nano
various iPod accessories
As you can see, I've just taken advantage of poor Apple! If everyone were like me Apple would surely be driven out of business! Don't tell Steve, his health is fragile and he might not be able to handle it!!!
There is NOTHING inherently anti-science in faith.
I suppose you could see it that way, if you think water is dry and day is night. Science is based on observation, testing and reason. Faith is based on...faith.
In fact, many claiming science are as dogmatic about their "faith" as the Jesus Freaks are. Al Gore for one.
I wonder if fucktards badgered Magellan's crew for being "round Earth fanatics". This criticism of Gore has nothing to with science and everything to do with wingnut idealogs keeping their heads in the sand.
Meanwhile I'm marked as "troll" for pointing out the fact that under secular progressive educational system run by left wing agenda people are failing miserably at creating literate people who can think critically.
Which left wingers, exactly. You sound like one of those people who needs to see a nice proctologist in North Korea for his persistent anal obstruction. Once he's done removing your head from your ass, you can take a good look around and see what "left wing" actually looks like.
Nixon start the EPA and IIRC had a top marginal tax rate of 70% while he was president. If Glenn Beck thinks Obama is a communist, I wonder how he would categorize Nixon's economic policies.
"Businessmen" and "Wealthy people" tend to get to those places by doing what works, constructively, which is more often than not tied to some sort of science or at least intellectual pursuit.
Or because of the connections they formed in church or in their college frat. The recent economic crash has proved that a whole lot of people took a whole lot of money not because of what they knew, but because of who they knew.
I don't find it surprising that you're proving his point out misdirection, by pedantically focusing on an old, partial definition of "liberalism" instead of people who are called liberals today.
I can sea why you'ld get you're panties in an bunch over such a trivial things. Its happened far to often irregardless of putting food on our families alot.
Rather than solving the source of the problem (kids being bored out of their minds with a shitty curriculum that covers the same topics in 10th grade that it did in 2nd grade), fucktard sadist wingnuts would prefer to dig out the paddle instead.
Too bad he didn't just take the advice from a gay columnist and DTMFA (Dump The Mother Fucker Already).