Sunday, October 16, 2011

Weekly Mashup Stage 71

In an effort to build up the Ethecofem community into a place where any walk of life will feel welcome to come and discuss things we are looking for another regular contributor, preferably of the female persuasion to balance things out a bit, but anyone interested is welcome. We like a variety of viewpoints, experiences, and perspectives. And as always April is on the eternal lookout for guest bloggers as well. If you're interested drop a line at ethecofem[at]gmail[dot]com.

Also feel free to treat this as an Open Thread.

I am not in what we would call a "good mood" right now. Having car trouble that's going to prevent me from going on a small business related outing tomorrow. Its so much the car trouble itself that bothers me but the business trip. I was pretty excited to go because I almost never get out of my computer lab at work and I wanted to prove to myself that I was worth more to myself (and my company) than just the guy that answers phones. Fuck.

Different Treatment For Tech Related Law-Breaking Depending On Whether Or Not You Have Power: "What bugs me the most is that those who get away with doing these kinds of things never seem to realize how they're in a position of power and protected. They just brush off their own failure to abide by the law as if it's nothing -- and never realize what they're doing to the people they go after."

MacFarlane: 'Family Guy' should've already ended: MacFarlene no longer interested in Family Guy?

Dad Taking Photos of Daughter Is Banned From Mall on Terror Concerns: Yeah I'm sure that policy was not intended to "stop innocent family members from taking pictures". But oh look that's exactly what how it was used.

VA COURTS: Grandmother guilty of throwing toddler off sky walk: Terrible, terrible, terrible. (Although I'm a little curious about why the father is barely even mentioned in this story.)

The ‘gentler’ sex: "The social perception of female abusers does more to keep victims silent than anything else, and not just because victims think no one will believe them, but also because the notion that females cannot abuse or that they only do so if they are crazy or made to by a man makes people less willing to examine the prevalence of female-perpetrated sexual violence. If we never bother to look for it or address it, how can we ever come to understand and prevent it?"

Waitress Reacts to Insult With Online Lynch Mob: The next time you want to make a name for yourself by going after someone who insulted you with guns blazing, it might do some good to make sure you got the right person.



UK Court Endorses Mom’s Abduction of Children: I've read more than a few times on the topic of custody situations where the father is getting pushed out of the children's live say something to the effect of "If he had been doing more parenting he would have gotten a more favorable custody agreement". Funny how those people seem to conveniently forget situations like this where a mom basically either kidnaps the kids or tricks the father into a position where she can take them and run. How much more "parenting" do dads need to do in order to prevent mothers from kidnapping their children?

School Threatens To Forfeit Football Game If Girl Plays: In the end the girl sat the game out. Now there is no question that this was a terrible thing to do to that girl and it really is an example of the sexism that I'm told that I try to ignore. But let's look at why they didn't want her to play in the first place. The simple answer is boys are raised to believe that its wrong to hit a girls under any circumstance from self defense to contact sports. Maybe if people would quit raising boys with such sexist ideas they wouldn't turn around and hold sexist presumptions about girls later.

Vancouver restaurant bans men from peeing standing up: Apparently it was a joke but if they wanted to do something about it they could have put small targets into the toilets. Basic research shows that men are actually more accurate when there is a target to piss on. And my own practical experience supports this.

Perdue opposes marriage amendment: If you've been here before you know I think intent matters right? Well Perdue's intent just cost her my respect. Yes she is going to oppose the constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man/one woman. However I have a big problem with WHY she is opposing it. "But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job." Does this mean that if NC's job market didn't look so bleak she would be supporting this amendment? She seems to oppose it because jobs are more important. I oppose it because the very idea of banning gays from getting married is wrong.


Because I'm in that kind of mood right now.


Til next week!
-->