The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-18-2015, 05:51 PM   #226
sexobon
^it sings^
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,829
Jocularity! Jocularity! Jocularity!
sexobon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2015, 10:10 PM   #227
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 63,797
Most places this wouldn't fly. There, the gender equality and equal opportunity officers are in a snit.
Quote:
A Black Forest town has earned criticism from gender equality officers and social media after advertising a "men's parking space" in a public car-park - using a naked woman's silhouette. The silhouette shows a woman lolling backwards, legs splayed and breasts exposed. Painted beside her are the words "Steep mountains, moist valleys" in German. But this semi-erotic image isn't printed on the cover of a top-shelf lads' magazine. In fact, it's plastered onto the wall of a public car-park - notifying drivers that this is a men's parking space.

Humour or horror?
This "Männerparkplatz" is the first of its kind in the Black Forest town of Triberg, reports Bild.de. Of course, it's become something of a tourist attraction since it was introduced in 2012 – and its new artwork looks set to increase its publicity. The artwork is a contribution to humour in today's society, Triberg Mayor Dr. Gallus Strobel claimed.

Werner Oppelt, the artist behind the image, said that passers-by have mostly been fans of the picture. "Again and again, people come to have a look – including visitors from Holland, Spain and Italy – and no-one has expressed any negative opinions." However, it seems not everyone is as enthusiastic about the artwork as its creator.
link
Attached Images
 
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 08:48 AM   #228
glatt
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 26,486
Bizzare. And Triburg is such a beautiful little village. I'd think this would be in some edge city or something, not in this place.
glatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 08:59 AM   #229
it
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 772
I keep reading it as "Sterile barge"... Which I suppose most women might prefer not to park under anyway...
it is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2015, 12:55 AM   #230
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
They made it !

Two women make Army Ranger history
Fox News - 8/21/15
Quote:
Capt. Kristen Griest, 26, of Orange, Connecticut, and 1st Lt. Shaye Haver, 25, of Copperas Cove, Texas,
will become the first women to wear the Army's coveted Ranger tab when they graduate
alongside 94 male soldiers Friday at Fort Benning.

Spc. Christopher Carvalho, a medic in the same Ranger school class,
said his skepticism ended on the first road march when the women
left many of their male counterparts far behind.

Classmates 2nd Lt. Michael Janowski and 2nd Lt. Zachary Hanger both told of how
Haver and Griest jumped in to help carry heavy loads when other male trainees were too fatigued to assist.
Apparently, one soldier still couldn't appreciate the irony of his ingrained orientation:
Quote:
Hanger called the women "absolutely physical studs"
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2015, 01:08 AM   #231
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 63,797
I wonder if there's a reason they're both officers? Coincidence, only officers could apply, being women officers means they are committed to an army career and in better shape, the army chose officers so they would less likely get shit from testosterone pumped grunts?
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2015, 06:36 PM   #232
sexobon
^it sings^
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,829
Coincidence most likely. They were simply among the best prepared for the physical and psychological demands. Limiting female equal opportunity to officers wouldn't fly since Ranger School is open to all ranks. IIRC, the rank comes off when reporting in to RIP (Ranger Induction Program) and students don't know each other's rank. Only the instructors would wear theirs and know that of the students.

NOTE: I don't see rank insignia on the students in the picture I posted.
sexobon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2015, 06:51 PM   #233
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 63,797
Thanks, I would imagine applicants are evaluated pretty heavily, both physical and psychological, before acceptance.
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2015, 11:45 PM   #234
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 63,797
Old broads are helpful too.

Quote:
Judith Jarvis Thomson, 85, another of MIT’s professors emeriti, is a philosopher best known for the elaboration of thought experiments called “trolley problems,” which test our moral intuitions. In the most famous trolley problem of all, Thomson asks her readers to imagine pushing a fat man onto a track in order to stop a runaway trolley from running over five people. She remains keenly interested in questions of rights and normativity (whether, ethically, one ought to do or refrain from doing something). Trolley problems are useful in thinking how autonomous vehicles and military robots could be programmed to behave in ways consistent with most people’s moral intuitions.

Helen Murray Free, 92, developed a series of self-testing kits for diabetes while working at Miles Laboratories in the second half of the last century. The tests transformed the way people with diabetes monitor their disease, helping make it into a manageable condition. Since retiring in 1982, she has devoted herself to promoting science education, particularly for young women and minorities.
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2015, 03:33 PM   #235
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 63,797
From prostitutionresearch.com .
Like drugs, legalize it and 90% of the problems go away. Maybe some of the problems that cause women to become one also.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Everything is interesting... look closer.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2015, 11:29 AM   #236
it
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 772
So I have been looking into gender politics again, reading on the 2015 Rosenfeld research paper saying that while women do initiate divorce more often in martial affairs, no gender initiates breakup more often in nonmartial affairs.

The media coverage is what you would expect, with most authors trying to form feminist explanations on how the reason is how oppressive marriage is for women, while comment sections get filled with people complaining how the court makes divorce inaccessible to men due to favoritism.

I am starting to wonder what is the legal history of contract partnerships legitimacy in courts. Are they usually held? How does it change between countries? What about matters concerning child custody or financial matters?
it is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2015, 12:02 PM   #237
DanaC
We have to go back, Kate!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,492
Don't know about elsewhere, but the tendency to assume maternal custody (in itself now starting to give way to assumptions of shared custody) is relatively recent. It was a reversal of the previous assumption of paternal custody. Up until the 20th century it was generally assumed that the man was the head of the household and had legal rights over both spouse and children. Up until the 19th century, in Britain, women essentially lost their legal identity when they married. It was called 'coverture' (or couverture)- literally it meant that she was covered by her husband - she existed under his authority and protection and therefore her legal identity was contained in his. She was not, legally speaking, an equal partner in the marriage, and she did not have the right to remove his children from him. Only if the child was still of nursing age (actually, I think it could sometimes count up to about 5 years old) was maternal custody considered appropriate.*

Not sure, but I think in cases of extreme cruelty, petitions for custody may have been successful sometimes. I know of at least one infamous case in the late 18th century in which such a petition was unsuccessful, despite the apparent sympathy of all concerned for the cruelty the wife had suffered and feared for her child.

By the 20th century attitudes had shifted and matters of custody were dealt with very differently - even so, I think assumptions of maternal custody as a preferred solution may not have started to take hold until the latter half of the century. But - I'm guessing there - it's a long time since I read up on this stuff.

* I should point out that up until relatively recently divorce of any kind was pretty much only available to the wealthy, and until the late 18th/early 19th century only through successful parliamentary petition. Separation, like marriage was a different matter further down the social and economic scale and they really did do things very differently. It varied enormously, from place to place, trade to trade, but there were certainly many working-class (as we might term them) cultures in which marriage was much less formalised, and where women were the custodians of children, with men moving in and out of the family and the children remaining with the women. Also, somewhat counter to the common image of distant fathers, there seems to have been a lot more sharing of parenting between wives and husbands in some working cultures - just from a pragmatic perspective.
__________________
Quote:
There's only so much punishment a man can take in pursuit of punani. - Sundae
http://sites.google.com/site/danispoetry/
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2015, 12:26 PM   #238
Sundae
polaroid of perfection
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
I found out as an adult that my Great-Grandfather was not married to my Great-Grandmother. He moved in and out of the house and in and out of prison. And it was not thought of as evil or disgusting - it was a convenience. He stored stolen goods at her house, and she could have been called on to testify against him in court, not being his wife. But he was already married, and marriage was for life, purely because (as you say) divorce was the privilege of the wealthy.

Not that she'd have let a copper in the house. She'd have hit him with a ladle and shrieked the place down until the neighbours came to make it a proper East End street party.

She married in the end, and stayed with him for life. He raised my Nan as his own. But Nan kept her father's name and still saw him every now and then. No word on whether her Mum did (I bet she did, because he sounded like he could talk the knickers off a nun).

Despite what romantic novels tell you, outside of Royalty and the Great Houses, where inheritance was an issue, being born out of wedlock held no stigma back then. I can only talk about the working poor of London, but WWI certainly helped a few girls without rings on their fingers get accepted. It was family business, and families got on with it.

I mean don't get me wrong - it depended on circumstances. Women were still being put in mental health units for liking the old hokey-pokey too much, ending up with their babies taken away and subsequent grief and/or post-natal depression leading to a stay so long they became institutionalised.

And Mum's cousin was forced into marrying his pregnant girlfriend the day she turned 16. I mean they're still married happily now, with two grown daughters. But it shows teenage pregnancy is nothing new.
__________________
Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac

Last edited by Sundae; 08-26-2015 at 01:08 PM. Reason: Clarity
Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2015, 12:31 PM   #239
it
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 772
@DanaC True - the argument at the time was that men had 100% of the financial responsibility so they'd keep the children in their households to keep them fed, the counter argument is that women didn't have access to the means to take financial responsibility, and so on and so forth.
The whole argument gets ridicules when you consider that - as you pointed out yourself - when you consider the slow revolving door of the time the reality is that if you could afford a divorce at all, you were most likely supporting your kids with capital from accumulated family assets, not your own income, and the people doing the day to day raising of the kids were most likely household staff, so really neither members would have much claim for earning rights through taking responsibility by today's standards. Add to that the fact that if the family owned land, chances are the children were part of the labor force - they were viewed as financial assets rather then financial responsibilities.

The historical context is important to understand why the laws today are what they are, and I appreciate that, but I don't think that changes the consequences of what they are, and while members of either genders can argue who gets more screwed over, the answer IMO remains - it doesn't work for either parties - find an alternative that does. A.K.A. an alternative contract.
it is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2015, 12:47 PM   #240
it
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae View Post
Despite what romantic novels tell you, outside of Royalty and the Great Houses, where inheritance was an issue, being born out of wedlock held no stigma back then. I can only talk about the working poor of London, but WWI certainly helped a few girls without rings on their fingers get accepted.
Interesting - that wasn't true in Jewish communities in eastern europe. My grandmother never married my grandfather, and from what I understand that turned out to be pretty messy business.

It gets interesting because she was able to support my father easily (Apparently taking part of the communist revolution had perks), and my grandfather couldn't - he was considered a con artist, they met every few years outside of the village because he wouldn't be allowed back there.

Also, never seen him but according to her I look and think more like him then anyone else in my family...
it is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
once an asshole


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.