katie ta achoo
Sep 24, 10:05 PM
Tell him yourself, the little brat started this thread because he is mad at mommy and daddy.
The thread starter will have to wait 18 years and 9 months to figure out if he'll let his own brat sleep over.
drake quotes 2011. and drake
drake quotes tumblr. drake quotes; drake quotes. imahawki. May 2, 09:54 AM. it will most likely be tomorrow if as has been pointed out tonight is visual
drizzy drake quotes from songs
more...
drizzy drake quotes from songs
drake quotes about love. good
more...
drake quotes about haters. lil
drake quotes 2011. drake
more...
lil wayne 2011 quotes. drake
drake quotes 2011
more...
drake quotes 2011
drake quotes tumblr
more...
drake quotes from lyrics
drake quotes and sayings
more...
drizzy drake quotes from songs
drake quotes about haters
more...
drake quotes 2011
drake quotes
drizzy drake quotes from songs
The thread starter will have to wait 18 years and 9 months to figure out if he'll let his own brat sleep over.
closin
Jan 8, 05:57 PM
I want to add an mp3 file into my project. It adds fine, however it stops playing after about ten seconds. Garage band shows that the whole file is still there, but it is limited to the first ten seconds.
Please help this is quiet frustrating.
Please help this is quiet frustrating.
brn2ski00
Apr 1, 08:53 AM
Actually unlocking takes about 2 minutes... so the markup is even higher. :D
allymo
Mar 29, 01:51 PM
Has anyone found this game in-store? I would like to get the game before I go on vacation, so the online shipping will take too long. Any chain store or locally in Minneapolis would be great, thanks!
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. :)
Jar Jar Binks
Apr 25, 08:27 PM
nevermind just started working again on its own
more...
LaMerVipere
Dec 9, 04:59 PM
I just got a new MacBook Pro this week, and it's sub zero here in Chicago, and I'm posting this from under a blanket in my drafty vintage apartment, so I opted for something a bit warm feeling.
SevenInchScrew
Apr 8, 11:24 AM
Always think of Jeremy when I see a Clubman.
That scene was him driving the Ariel Atom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v4YNkurhLk), though I'm sure the effect on one's face would be much the same in the Caterham.
That scene was him driving the Ariel Atom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v4YNkurhLk), though I'm sure the effect on one's face would be much the same in the Caterham.
more...
MacBytes
Jan 5, 11:38 PM
Category: Mac Websites
Link: TheMacMind: MacWorld Expo 2004 Coverage (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040106003833)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
Link: TheMacMind: MacWorld Expo 2004 Coverage (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040106003833)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn
tablo13
Apr 23, 12:06 PM
I want to use this wallpaper for my LockMS, it's set as iOS lockscreen wallpaper but it's not in my camera roll. What is the location for iOS lockscreen wallpaper?
more...
j.larsen
May 2, 01:37 AM
Do you ever question your life
Do you ever wonder why
Do you ever see in your dreams
All the castles in the sky :)
Well, I'm pretty happy with my @me.com
Do you ever wonder why
Do you ever see in your dreams
All the castles in the sky :)
Well, I'm pretty happy with my @me.com
macman134
Dec 11, 12:40 PM
http://i713.photobucket.com/albums/ww136/macman134/40298de8.jpg
more...
nidserz
May 3, 12:11 AM
Hi everyone,
I've jailbroken my iPhone for the last 8 months, but have upgraded and been using it normally.
However, today when I turned it to vibrate, the bell with the line showed up on the screen, but on the top right hand corner next to the battery symbol, there was no indication that it was on vibrate mode. Is this normal (i may have forgotten)? Is the symbol just for jailbroken phones? I suddenly noticed this so I am not sure. I have asked around people, but gotten no help. Thanks in advance. Sorry for the stupid question.
I've jailbroken my iPhone for the last 8 months, but have upgraded and been using it normally.
However, today when I turned it to vibrate, the bell with the line showed up on the screen, but on the top right hand corner next to the battery symbol, there was no indication that it was on vibrate mode. Is this normal (i may have forgotten)? Is the symbol just for jailbroken phones? I suddenly noticed this so I am not sure. I have asked around people, but gotten no help. Thanks in advance. Sorry for the stupid question.
Pillar
Sep 4, 12:13 AM
Here ya go.
jeaaah! thanks
jeaaah! thanks
more...
applemike
Feb 4, 03:46 PM
i have no links its a photo i took on our trip to vegas.
Thank you for the quick reply.
It's a shame, very nice photo there. Thank you anyway
Thank you for the quick reply.
It's a shame, very nice photo there. Thank you anyway
Melrose
Feb 1, 12:13 PM
I have been beyond busy this past year, and haven't been able to post my guitart desktops, something I tried to do monthly.
So here's hitting back with a bang and making up for the missed months
...
I was just wondering if you were going to post new snaps of your strings. Thx! :)
So here's hitting back with a bang and making up for the missed months
...
I was just wondering if you were going to post new snaps of your strings. Thx! :)
more...
steadysignal
Apr 8, 07:24 AM
"allocative deadweight loss"
What does that mean?
that term somehow makes me feel bad about myself.
:)
anyway, been upgrading every year with the offset of selling the old equipment to pay for part or most of the new.
added a nice crack to my iphone 4 front panel and was considering the $200 replacement through :apple: now, i may just do it, stick with the four until the true end of my two year, and upgrade then, to avoid the extra $50.
unless the latest revision has something in it necessary to the function of the device, is the upgrade tax going to be worth it to most people?
What does that mean?
that term somehow makes me feel bad about myself.
:)
anyway, been upgrading every year with the offset of selling the old equipment to pay for part or most of the new.
added a nice crack to my iphone 4 front panel and was considering the $200 replacement through :apple: now, i may just do it, stick with the four until the true end of my two year, and upgrade then, to avoid the extra $50.
unless the latest revision has something in it necessary to the function of the device, is the upgrade tax going to be worth it to most people?
alent1234
Apr 6, 12:16 PM
Agreed. I just spent 55k on 9.6TB of raw fibre channel storage for our 3PAR. That's 16 600GB drives if you were wondering.
and i bet they all have western digital or seagate labels on them just like our EMC ones
and i bet they all have western digital or seagate labels on them just like our EMC ones
LegendKillerUK
Apr 7, 08:38 AM
4.3.1 is terrible on the 4th gen iPod touches. Home screen animations lag and more often than not skip totally. battery life is down, apps from the multitasking tray aren't usable upon switching to them for a few seconds - it's just terrible.
Thankfully, I had been jailbroken so I'm back on 4.2.1.
Thankfully, I had been jailbroken so I'm back on 4.2.1.
Chip NoVaMac
Jan 13, 05:38 PM
Not at all - it's a well-established truism that Americans prefer sedans over hatchbacks and wagons, they prefer large, torquey engines (usually V6 or V8), and they prefer lots of car for cheap as opposed to a smaller, higher-quality car.
Though cars are being kept longer these days than in the past, Americans tend to dispose of their cars at a greater rate than, say, in Europe. So it makes sense that cheaper build quality is more viable when the car is not expected to last forever.
Will be interesting to see if VW survives the Americanization of their car line. One of the tings I saw last year was that they are going to make their new cars feel more like what Americans are used to driving. And that is a shame - since one of the few joys I had with my POC '99 New Beetle was how fun it was to drive. So much for fahrvergn�gen - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrvergn�gen
Though cars are being kept longer these days than in the past, Americans tend to dispose of their cars at a greater rate than, say, in Europe. So it makes sense that cheaper build quality is more viable when the car is not expected to last forever.
Will be interesting to see if VW survives the Americanization of their car line. One of the tings I saw last year was that they are going to make their new cars feel more like what Americans are used to driving. And that is a shame - since one of the few joys I had with my POC '99 New Beetle was how fun it was to drive. So much for fahrvergn�gen - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrvergn�gen
MackPro91
Sep 2, 08:12 PM
Oh wow your's is amazing. Any chance of the original?
Anywhere here is mine! (It isn't interesting as I saw someone else with the same one last week haha!)
http://i56.tinypic.com/x22ln4.png
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/710/circlesg.jpg
Thank you! Here you go! Can't remember where I got it from, sorry.
Anywhere here is mine! (It isn't interesting as I saw someone else with the same one last week haha!)
http://i56.tinypic.com/x22ln4.png
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/710/circlesg.jpg
Thank you! Here you go! Can't remember where I got it from, sorry.
Rodimus Prime
Dec 25, 11:22 PM
For me an unexpected gift was a kindle. I never really expressed much interested in them to either of my parents but they do know I like to read. I always though it was kind of a limited device and then I am given on. Get a book on and and started reading to day. I have to say I am very surpised and find that I really like. People are not kidding whey they say eink is very nice to read off of. Much nicer than a back lite LCD screen (iPad, iPod, iPhone). I see my reading going up a lot now.
Also got Halo Reach
New wallet
Tune up for my mountain bike.
Some legos
and clothing.
Best part was enjoying time with my family.
Also got Halo Reach
New wallet
Tune up for my mountain bike.
Some legos
and clothing.
Best part was enjoying time with my family.
kdarling
Apr 27, 12:57 PM
My takeaway is this:
Section 222 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000222----000-.html)of the Communications Act deals with carriers keeping user information private, including location, but of course that has nothing to do with phone OS makers such as Apple and Google.
Now I suspect that Congress will want to bring non-carriers under their wing as well.
Smartphones used to be a pretty sleepy backwater area, where the press rarely bothered much. Now they're daily headline news, under extra scrutiny.
Section 222 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000222----000-.html)of the Communications Act deals with carriers keeping user information private, including location, but of course that has nothing to do with phone OS makers such as Apple and Google.
Now I suspect that Congress will want to bring non-carriers under their wing as well.
Smartphones used to be a pretty sleepy backwater area, where the press rarely bothered much. Now they're daily headline news, under extra scrutiny.
mikeschmeee
Apr 8, 07:56 PM
Another rig shot...
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5024/5601434891_05c08e7522.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5601434891/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5024/5601434891_05c08e7522.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5601434891/)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario