The green is a map of America.
The red is the projected path of Hurricane Earl as of about 7:30 pm.
The yellow dot is where I live.
I'll keep you folks posted.
"The end of discrimination is good news but most business travellers usually want to sit as far away as possible from unaccompanied children so this is unlikely to have a big impact on where people sit on-board."If that is the case then why institute a policy that pretty much forces businessmen to move away from unaccompanied kids? Based on that they couldn't have just left those men alone and they would have just avoided those kids. Problem is not all of the men on those flights are businessmen. And if its "unlikely to have a big impact on where people sit on-board" then why make the policy in the first place?
A spokesman for BA said: "We carry tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors every year and take great pride in the service that we provide to them and their parents.Wow. Sexism against male travelers is a service?
"We have recently changed our internal advice to our seating and airport teams to ensure that the seating of unaccompanied minors is managed in a safe but non discriminatory manner."In other words they have finally realized (or finally have been forced to admit) that being male is not a criteria for being a threat to unaccompanied minors.
It would be wrong to say I prefer not to tell hurtful jokes. I just prefer to direct the hurt upwards instead of downwards – which I explain to straight white men as “It’s funny when the pupil puts a tack on the headmaster’s chair: it’s not funny when the headmaster does the same thing to the pupil.”I can't get behind that.
It’s funny when women make fun of men. When black people make fun of white people. When gay people make fun of straight people. When disprivilege makes fun of privilege.
No offense to Danny but he comes off as a little whiny, but let me explain. Women have always been policed by women and men to stay in their role, but only recently did men get policed by women to change their role and men to stay in their role (the feminist movement was the start of this). When you look at it in this light it’s obvious to see that men are defending their privilege (their privilege to only be questioned by men). Men are finally feeling the pressure that women have felt for centuries and amazingly enough they are reacting the same way women did when we started the feminist movement…The anger of some men is misdirected at feminists because they(feminists) are speaking up against women’s roles, and therefore threatening men’s roles by adding the pressure that women have ALWAYS felt. So excuse me if I’m missing some sympathy for men who don’t want to separate from the roles SOCIETY is enforcing, the same thing that feminism wants, yet men fight so vehemently against.I'm gonna be nice and let that first sentence slide. Here goes.
Women have always been policed by women and men to stay in their role, but only recently did men get policed by women to change their role and men to stay in their role (the feminist movement was the start of this).This is a sentiment that I've heard a few times before. For some reason there are those out there that think that no man has ever been treated unfairly because of his gender until after the start of the feminist movement. Also note how kristina manages to conclude that the pressure on men to change or not is along a strictly gendered line where women are the only ones that want men to change and only men want men to stay the same. My own experience (and I'll bet a lot of other men's experiences too) pretty much show that to be a lie. There are men who want men to change and men who want men to not change. There are women who want men to change and women who want men to not change. Trying to absolve women of any and all wrong doing in the gender realm is NOT going to help make things better for people.
When you look at it in this light it’s obvious to see that men are defending their privilege (their privilege to only be questioned by men).Lay in the false foundation then build the false house. Yes there are men that are trying to defend their privilege but that does not translate into presuming that every man is doing this. In fact even the existence of male feminists (not to mention MRAs and other men who identify by other titles or no title at all) would contradict that assumption wouldn't it?
Men are finally feeling the pressure that women have felt for centuries and amazingly enough they are reacting the same way women did when we started the feminist movement…Again with the false house. Who is to say that no man has even wanted to go outside his gender role before now?
The anger of some men is misdirected at feminists because they(feminists) are speaking up against women’s roles, and therefore threatening men’s roles by adding the pressure that women have ALWAYS felt.This I can agree with. There are some men out there who enjoy unfair privileges and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. Problem is people take that fact, staple it on the foreheads of all men, then cry foul when men aren't coming in droves to joy feminism.
So excuse me if I’m missing some sympathy for men who don’t want to separate from the roles SOCIETY is enforcing, the same thing that feminism wants, yet men fight so vehemently against.And this is why I don't go rushing to join up with feminism. For some reason the men that don't want society to change for the better are held up as the representation of all of us and then used as "proof" that none of us, except for the few enlightened male feminists want change.
Danny, if my assumptions of your intentions are wrong it’s ok to tell me, I won’t jump down your throat just because you’re a man, the only reason I said anything was because it sounded similar to MRA arguments, it was to engage discussion though I may have done that poorly and I’m sorry.She did apologize for her words and I'm cool with that. Gender is a hot topic and its real easy to to get heated up real fast. But one other thing. "MRA arguments"? I really hope she isn't one of those who has written off the entire MRA movement...
![]() | ||||
| Yeah. Whoever built this must have Win for their last name. |
Unlike an antibiotic cream, which promotes healing by preventing infection, Nexagon is actually speeding up your body's healing process. Or, in the case of ulcers, it's jumpstarting a healing process that's failed to start. Doctors have been testing Nexagon on people with chronic ulcers on their legs, which are wounds that essentially never heal or take at least six months to do so. After just four weeks, some patients reported they were completely healed up.That's just wild. I remember barely 10 years ago reading scifi novels about where compounds like this would be applied to injuries and cut recovery time to days instead of the weeks it would take in the real world. I supposed the real world is catching up to science fiction.
What I would suggest, though, if you are earnest about wanting to dismantle yourself of the unearned male privilege you carry, is for you to read some feminist theory (say the past 40 years worth).Okay so I haven't read all 40 years of it. But it seems that if you do disagree with some of it then the only reason you do is because you didn't read all it. I guess.
Then you might be able to carry on a legitimate debate about how to dismantle privilege, rather than dribbling on about how privilege is selective and obvious and how it’s totes unfair for women to suggest that men, even the nice men, have social, economic, political, and religious privilege over women.I'm gonna have to find that section in the 40 years of theory that says that the unfair advantages that women have over men really don't count or matter and that addressing and dealing with male privilege will fix everything. And really "dribbling"?
[I'll lob you an easy ball though -- you can even do this kind of homework over the weekend. Why don't you go around the town you are living in and check out how easy it is to buy condoms. You could also check out affordability of condoms, selection of condoms, hours of the day when your access to condoms is restricted by business needs, etc. Then you can compare the relative ease of procuring male contraceptives to the current political backlash against women's access to birth control. If you can't spot the privilege during your escapades, your lot in life is truly hopeless.]The lesson here folks is that the privileges that men have over women actually DOES wipe any that women have over men and any and all damages that happen to men. Oh and its also okay for feminists to insult people. Well chances are that person probably don't think its insulting they're just "calling me out" I'm sure.


In November last year, we carried a heart-rending story of three women who kidnapped an 18-year-old man in Chitungwiza and forced him to be intimate with one of them. Of all the places, they chose to commit the heinous act at a cathedral in Harare's city centre.But I think the other language throughout the article kinda gives a tell about why people think this type of crime is so shocking.
This was followed by another story of a 15-year-old boy who was abducted by three men in Warren Park and forced to be intimate with a woman at knife-point at a secluded spot in the suburb. And only last month, a Mwenezi man was drugged and forced to be intimate with two women who had offered him a lift along the Masvingo-Ngundu road.
Before that, four women forced themselves on a 25-year-old Masvingo man at gunpoint after forcing him to drink an unknown concoction that later led him to pass out for eight hours. As if that was not enough, two women forced a 44-year-old man to be intimate with them while another man stood guard. The incident happened last Tuesday near Banket in Mashonaland West.
Rape cases in Zimbabwe have always been associated with men raping women. But the kind of rape we are witnessing now baffles the mind.That association is what's causing the bafflement now. While the majority of rapes in Zimbabwe have been male against female just like in other parts of the world (even here in the States) people have settled into the "fact" that the very definition of rape is a sexual crime that men commit against women. This is why people have such a hard time coming to terms with the fact that women can and do commit sex crimes (this also applies to most violent and physical crimes).
When it appeared the police and the courts were beginning to have the upper hand in dealing with rape against women and minors, we now have this new phenomenon. What has become of some among us lately?You know that means? That means that the gendered approach to rape isn't as effective as some have already decided it is. It doesn't do as much good hear about a rape and instantly go to thinking that it was a man that raped a woman/girl. They actually have to apply an open mind. And not to sound too cynical but maybe if they hadn't adopted that narrow "man = perp/woman = victim" gendered mindset in the first place they wouldn't be having such a hard time now.
They're also plain old sexist for a number of reasons. For one thing, this is always a crisis for black women. As one of my colleagues pointed out when we did a presentation on this, the percentage of black men who have never been married is quite similar (43% maybe--I need to find the number she unearthed) but we never hear about the black man's marriage crisis.The folks in the comment section seem to have a hard time realizing why this is the case. But I suppose it that would be hard for people who seem to not be able to get past the idea of male privilege and all that shit.
He had grown up, he said, with the slang terms for Arabs and black Africans and he did not believe the words were offensive.His upbringing and his beliefs have no bearing on the history of that word. I was brought thinking that calling someone lame was not offensive. Doesn't mean that calling some lame is okay. Next there's this:
'I'm not a member of the "cafe, chardonnary and socialist" set - to me that is everyday language,' he told the court.If I didn't know any better I would think that this guy thinks that regular common folk are okay with that language and to be offended by it means that one is high class. Yeah right.
ABC News did an informative little experiment. It hired a couple of actors, a young man and a young woman, and sent them out into an urban park. They had the woman verbally and physically abuse the man; she hit him repeatedly, screamed insults in his ear, slapped him grabbed him by the hair, etc. ABC had cameras stationed nearby to surreptitiously record the responses of passersby. What the cameras show is nothing less than astonishing.This reminded me of a similar experiment that was done on the Tyra Banks show a few years ago.
Now, in a true free market, when supply was less than demand, a competitor would step up production, but (oh wait!) there can't be any competitor, because the patent means that Genzyme is currently the only one legally allowed to make the drug.So that quite literally means that if another company were to start making this disease treating possible life saving drug (and apparently there is one confirmed death from this) they would be violating patent laws and would be staring down the barrel of a lawsuit.
The actual research for Fabrazyme was actually done by the Mount Sinai School of Medicine financed by the National Institute of Health. Yes, you read that right. This drug was discovered with taxpayer money... but they were still able to get a patent and then license it to Genzyme.So the research and development that brought this drug into being was paid for by taxpayers (that would be us) but its still patentable.
She sought sugar daddies to pay $1,000 per week for her company and sex.Okay you should really be mindful of relationship advice from a person who in the industry they give an okay to. Unless you think that her directly (at least formerly) benefiting from the actions of adulterous men have nothing with her opinion here.
"It's better to walk the dog on a leash than let it escape through an unseen hole in the back fence."I'm sure she didn't meant it literally but I'll point it out just in case. Despite what popular feelings of angry women may be men are not dogs. And if you are having a problem understanding that then think about the phrase, "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free.", and how its used by men talking about having sexual relationships with women but not committing for the long term. So in short women aren't cows and men aren't dogs.