sikuss
Feb 2, 07:43 PM
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5412238812_85f4ec1e45.jpg
Riding season almost here in the NE!!
Riding season almost here in the NE!!
gcoghill
Apr 28, 09:22 PM
Why? The law requires an rights owner to defend its IP or risk losing it. These suits are just business, no hard feelings, as seen by Apple's monster-sized component contract w/ Samsung. Any yes, business is about making money.
Every time there's a patent or copyright article and people go off the deep end calling these companies crazy/evil, etc, I wish the article would indicate the fact that they are actually required to do so or risk losing their patent/trademarks. Doesn't even matter if they want to or not.
Every time there's a patent or copyright article and people go off the deep end calling these companies crazy/evil, etc, I wish the article would indicate the fact that they are actually required to do so or risk losing their patent/trademarks. Doesn't even matter if they want to or not.
shays992000
Feb 9, 12:30 PM
Att on facebook said you must on the Att nation 450 &900 or the family 700 or higher to qualify and it's not cost additional for the service.
This will be interesting! If this is true then AT&T is also trying to get old subscribers off of their grandfathered plans......
This will be interesting! If this is true then AT&T is also trying to get old subscribers off of their grandfathered plans......
Sun Baked
Feb 14, 01:42 PM
I wonder which new moderator is going to clean up the mess mymemmory just made in here...
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
A post likely to turn this into another mymemmory bashing thread -- and it's not even a thread about women or body parts. :(
more...
sporadicMotion
Dec 2, 02:25 AM
http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/zz19/sporadicMotion/Screenshot2010-12-02at122222AM.jpg
marksman
Apr 4, 12:37 PM
I love all the 'worst carrier ever' comments. Do none of you realize VZW is already charging that much?
Of course not this is ignorant knee jerk city here. Most people don't even buy their phones like this, so this impacts a relatively small number of people. The people it probably impacts the most are those gaming the systems for the phones.
This is not some kind of change or charge that is going to impact the majority of AT&T customers in any way.
Of course some dummies will switch to Verizon and be in the exact same boat because they don't think nor do they educate themselves before they speak, write or act.
It is like cavemen, "More money charge bad... Ugga Bugga"
Of course not this is ignorant knee jerk city here. Most people don't even buy their phones like this, so this impacts a relatively small number of people. The people it probably impacts the most are those gaming the systems for the phones.
This is not some kind of change or charge that is going to impact the majority of AT&T customers in any way.
Of course some dummies will switch to Verizon and be in the exact same boat because they don't think nor do they educate themselves before they speak, write or act.
It is like cavemen, "More money charge bad... Ugga Bugga"
more...
mscriv
Apr 6, 12:49 PM
Worth quoting, given the back-and-forth that's gone on since this was originally posted.
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
phas3
Dec 15, 12:47 PM
link please!!! :)
here it is
http://wallpaper.skins.be/evangeline-lilly/27582/1680x1050/
and as for the hobbit, I KNOW RIGHT! what the heck man....she's canadian maybe thats where I should move to.
here it is
http://wallpaper.skins.be/evangeline-lilly/27582/1680x1050/
and as for the hobbit, I KNOW RIGHT! what the heck man....she's canadian maybe thats where I should move to.
more...
Snowy_River
Oct 31, 01:11 PM
Good point... I hadn't considered the battery time. By this time next year, the memory chips will definitely be a lot cheaper so 2G (or more) will be easily do-able in something as small as the Shuffle for a decent price. Hopefully the battery life can be improved as well. Not much use being able to store 36 hours of music and not being able to listen to it.
Oh, great, now we've got someone referring to '2G' as 2 gigabytes. The confusion is just going to grow!!!
Oh, great, now we've got someone referring to '2G' as 2 gigabytes. The confusion is just going to grow!!!
chrissie66
Apr 17, 02:47 PM
hi i have just bought an ipod touch from my friend she deleted all her songs etc from it but it wont let me add any apps or any music,i have spoken to apple and they have said to restore and update but that hasnt done anything can anyone give me any advice on what to do ? thanks x
more...
MikeT
Jul 26, 07:49 PM
At this point, I couldn't really care less about Blu Ray or HD-DVD. I'd be more excited if Apple included Lightscribe or equivalent capability in their drives. Unlabeled discs are piled high on my desk.
twoodcc
Feb 12, 06:44 PM
I'll keep you updated. Currently I'm working on getting my 10 WU's in under my passkey (at 7 right now) and after that I'll shift the i7 iMac over to -bigadv to take advantage of the pts bonuses and then we'll see what it can really do. Hopefully some big PPD. I'm folding under the name 206pilot.
sounds good. let us know what kind of ppd that iMac gets with bigadv units.
sounds good. let us know what kind of ppd that iMac gets with bigadv units.
more...
fluffer
Feb 27, 11:17 AM
Are we allowed to discuss Installous issues on this site?
MacBandit
Dec 23, 11:36 PM
I know it's not enough to stop the drop but I just added a second PS3 to my numbers. I've been using my MacBook to rerender a bunch of videos lately once it's done I'll be back to folding with it again. This will bring me from my typical 1200-1600points/day average up to around 2,600-2,800.
more...
samcraig
Nov 11, 10:22 AM
It's coming out the same day as the white iPhone ;)
MrChurchyard
May 1, 09:32 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Castle on a cloud seems the likely origin
There's also the "my home (folder) is my Castle" angle, though. :)
I for one would like a constantly backed-up and synced home folder.
Castle on a cloud seems the likely origin
There's also the "my home (folder) is my Castle" angle, though. :)
I for one would like a constantly backed-up and synced home folder.
more...
Track&Share
Oct 13, 08:37 PM
Check the signature link and let me know if you like to combination.
KeithPratt
Apr 4, 06:21 AM
It's not. The M4V wrapper just allows protection to be used, but in your case it won't be.
simsaladimbamba
May 6, 06:52 PM
Don't you have some USB keyboard lying around?
But I have had no problem accessing boot options with a wireless keyboard and a 2007 iMac.
But I have had no problem accessing boot options with a wireless keyboard and a 2007 iMac.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 12:54 PM
We iPhone and 3G iPad owners are plenty upset by this as well.
Well, to be fair, you express hate toward Apple constantly. And given the conspiracy ideas in your signature, you are plenty upset about lots of things in your life. So I would hardly consider you a typical case. Apple could offer free computers tomorrow and you'd instantly post a message expressing your hatred of Apple for doing that.
Well, to be fair, you express hate toward Apple constantly. And given the conspiracy ideas in your signature, you are plenty upset about lots of things in your life. So I would hardly consider you a typical case. Apple could offer free computers tomorrow and you'd instantly post a message expressing your hatred of Apple for doing that.
Rt&Dzine
Mar 2, 01:05 PM
Is there a reason those charts in the opening post have to be so large?
miles01110
Apr 25, 08:01 AM
You cannot set a webmail account to open when you click on a mailto URL. If you want to set up your e-mail account in your Desktop mail client (like Entourage) that is usually possible depending on what kind of e-mail account you have.
berkut
Nov 13, 06:31 PM
From the Transformers 2 Blu Ray, watch the documentaries when Bay is visiting his editors, 4 editors cutting separately, they all had Mac setups with FCP running.
So now I wonder if they used both FCP and Avid. And the quote from the editor is stupid on that link "I don't know anyone doing 200mil movies and not cutting them on media composer". Benjamin Button was cut on FCP and it's a 200mil movie.
Are you sure it was FCP and not just the generic NLE layout you saw?
They wouldn't use both - if they were using MC, the only other app they might export to would be Scratch.
Also, he's technically correct: Benjamin Button's budget was $150 million.
So now I wonder if they used both FCP and Avid. And the quote from the editor is stupid on that link "I don't know anyone doing 200mil movies and not cutting them on media composer". Benjamin Button was cut on FCP and it's a 200mil movie.
Are you sure it was FCP and not just the generic NLE layout you saw?
They wouldn't use both - if they were using MC, the only other app they might export to would be Scratch.
Also, he's technically correct: Benjamin Button's budget was $150 million.
Doctor Q
May 5, 12:07 PM
Are there any celebrities who promote blood donation or call attention to it by publicizing their own donations? None come to mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment