Back on topic ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/27/dem-resolution-warns-global-warming-could-force-women-into-prostitution-1426537316/

A California congresswoman warns global warming will be so detrimental to poor women, it will drive them to prostitution.

Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., has re-introduced legislation that forces the government to address all “policies and programs in the United States that are globally related to climate change” through the lens of gender.

---

Just imagine a Male Republican saying that.

The reaction?

Shock and surprise that a Republican would A) acknowledge the threat of global warming B) cares about a poor person and C) cares about a poor person who is a women no less.

Back on topic ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/27/dem-resolution-warns-global-warming-could-force-women-into-prostitution-1426537316/

A California congresswoman warns global warming will be so detrimental to poor women, it will drive them to prostitution.

Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., has re-introduced legislation that forces the government to address all “policies and programs in the United States that are globally related to climate change” through the lens of gender.

Just imagine a Male Republican saying that.

The reaction?

It would be laughable mainly because most decisions are made by men through the lens of their gender. You don't need to legislate for something that already happens on a daily basis.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Amazing in a vile, insulting manner.

We must now analyze your Posts regarding the Foundations of your 'Thinking'.

Your replies do 'Out' you.

Calling someone "vile" is not an argument. It is an insult.

If you disagree, disagree and back up why you think you are right and I am wrong.

Otherwise, knock it off. No more insults Clyde.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Amazing in a vile, insulting manner.

We must now analyze your Posts regarding the Foundations of your 'Thinking'.

Your replies do 'Out' you.

Calling someone "vile" is not an argument. It is an insult.

If you disagree, disagree and back up why you think you are right and I am wrong.

Otherwise, knock it off. No more insults Clyde.

Could you one, please show what you Posted, before attcking the reply.

The post was It would be laughable mainly because most decisions are made by men through the lens of their gender. You don't need to legislate for something that already happens on a daily basis.

Decisions by Men are Negative (only/mostly), and women would be different? Why?

How is this different from your reply that a "significant" portion of men are (fill-in the negative).

Isn't saying one Gender, Race, Sexual Orientation is, and the other is not, bigotry?

Just a question I, and others, have.

Could you enlighten us about the difference.

Perhaps there is some confusion here as to what I actually meant, because you clearly did not understand my point. (see, now we can communicate better because you are actually explaining what you have understood from what I wrote)

My first post was referring to something called "rape culture". We live in a society that trivialises certain things done to women and victim blames. For example, women are called 'hysterical' or 'over reacting' about these things. They are also not believed or they are blamed for what happens to them. We see this all the time when comments are made such as "what was she wearing" or "crying rape because of buyers remorse". Jokes about rape are common. Taking advantage of a women who is drunk or unable to consent is actually considered a legitimate dating technique. The concept of rape culture would take a long to time to fully explain, but it is everywhere, and it is pervasive. That is why we have problems with men having a joke or a laugh about these things.

A significant portion of men are still unaware of deny the pervasive nature of rape culture. I have heard my own son's come out with things that they have heard from their peers that they certainly have not heard from me.

The second post I made was about the fact that most major decisions are made by men. They still hold most of the positions of power because we still live in a patriarchal society. If they are going to make laws that effect the other gender then they need a little help to see things through the lens of the other gender. I am sure that you would feel uncomfortable if most of the laws were made and enforced by women with little or no understanding of the consequence on you. You were upset enough about the idea of a law being made that makes men sit down to pee. I don't think many women would consider this a terrible law or a huge infringement on men...but they are looking at it through the lens of their gender. I repeat the point..most laws are made and enforced by men. So by definition, most laws are made through the lens of the male gender.

So if you still don't understand what I am trying to say, please ask.

If you insult me or accuse me of something because you have misunderstood what I wrote I will delete your post.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Believe it or nor, we do agree with much.

Regarding your last line (in BOLD):

This will also apply, and your Post Deleted - If you insult me, or accuse me, when you misunderstand me? Correct?

Clyde. I don't make ad hominem attacks against you. You often misread or misunderstand my posts and rather than asking for clarification you fly off the handle and start calling me names.

In future, if you are offended by something I write, ask for clarification. Re-read it. Think about the different ways a post can be read or understood and ask yourself if you really do have the actual meaning behind it. Sometimes I might get the punctuation wrong or most often I assume that there is a certain common ground that I don't need to state and make a brief statement based on that understanding.

I have to say, pretty much every time you freaked out about something I've written is is because you haven't actually understood what I am trying to say.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Amazing in a vile, insulting manner.

We must now analyze your Posts regarding the Foundations of your 'Thinking'.

Your replies do 'Out' you.

Calling someone "vile" is not an argument. It is an insult.

If you disagree, disagree and back up why you think you are right and I am wrong.

Otherwise, knock it off. No more insults Clyde.

INSULT? Not in Swedish!
vidrig obnoxious, disgusting, vile, foul, loathsome, disgustful
värdelös Useless, worthless, valueless, chaffy, cheesy, vile
usel wretched, bad, miserable, pitiful, abysmal, vile
gräslig awful, atrocious, horrid, ghastly, terrible, vile

Please explain.

Just imagine a Male Republican saying that.

The reaction?

Shock and surprise that a Republican would A) acknowledge the threat of global warming B) cares about a poor person and C) cares about a poor person who is a women no less.

That's the answer?

Oh now I understand. YOU believe the reaction would be the same. Correct Мишель?

No, I may have said it in a bit of a dry and sarcastic manner, but I honestly believe the reaction would be shock and surprise, given how the Republican party has handled issues related to women and global warming. I mean, we are talking about the party whose members quite often deny that global warming is a thing and who are at the forefront in the war against women in the US. It would be very unexpected to see them bring up how global warming might negatively affect poor women in particular.

What a lovely upstanding police officer...

"one detective telling the 12-year-old boy to "do it to someone older next time""

More failures

Sigh:(
Why do law enforcers do this?
The boy is most likely to become a criminal when he's getting older.

Believe it or nor, we do agree with much.

Regarding your last line (in BOLD):

This will also apply, and your Post Deleted - If you insult me, or accuse me, when you misunderstand me? Correct?

Clyde. I don't make ad hominem attacks against you. You often misread or misunderstand my posts and rather than asking for clarification you fly off the handle and start calling me names.

In future, if you are offended by something I write, ask for clarification. Re-read it. Think about the different ways a post can be read or understood and ask yourself if you really do have the actual meaning behind it. Sometimes I might get the punctuation wrong or most often I assume that there is a certain common ground that I don't need to state and make a brief statement based on that understanding.

I have to say, pretty much every time you freaked out about something I've written is is because you haven't actually understood what I am trying to say.

And you haven'the understood me.

What is the difference?

Note: No reason to censor my reply, responding to your reply. Correct?

You've answered a question with a question. How about you put forward your opinion?

---

Reality Internet Personality

You've answered a question with a question. How about you put forward your opinion?

I believe that requires him to have one ......

---

Fairly topical subject at the moment here in Canada where a women was refused to the right to testify because she was wearing a Hijab.
Hijab-wearing woman should be allowed to testify, Harper spokesman says

All this trying to 'free' women by telling them what they can and cannot wear just seems like more of the same attempts at control. There is also an element of racism here too which is explained better in this article:

Here’s What’s Really Happening When White Saviors Try to ‘Save’ Muslim Women

This is the truth: There is no culture or nation exempt from misogyny, in forms all across the spectrum. In all the cultures I belong to – and there are a few of them – gender discrimination is a vast and deeply rooted issue.

---

Reality Internet Personality

..
Appears I am winning the discussion.

What discussion would that be, Clyde? Because all you've done is ask questions that are also totally off the topic of the thread.

If your imagined discussion is on topic, go ahead and actually contribute to it. We would actually like to hear your opinions.

---

Reality Internet Personality

..

BTW: I do agree regarding the second item in your previous post. Not the first.

The problem is showing one's face while giving testimony. VERY important in determining truthfulness.

And what about Photo ID's.

A Hijab does not cover the face. Its just a headscarf. Would the judge also expect a nun to remove her headscarf?

For photo id's the women in question did remove her headscarf. However, that is not the same as being in an open court where anyone can see.

---

Reality Internet Personality

The problem is showing one's face while giving testimony. VERY important in determining truthfulness.

Before you embarrass yourself further become educated.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/24118241

---

Fairly topical subject at the moment here in Canada where a women was refused to the right to testify because she was wearing a Hijab.
Hijab-wearing woman should be allowed to testify, Harper spokesman says...

OK, so the Hijab is what can be described as a head scarf. So that suggests the face isn't covered. So to my view, there should be no problem there if there is no 'slight/disrespect against the court' intended by what is being worn.


And sounds like the Judge has got herself cornered:

... "We are in communication with the victim and a couple of lawyers and we think judicial procedure should be started."

Court spokeswoman Annie-Claude Bergeron said Friday the judge's decision was final.

"In law, you can't revise your own ruling," Bergeron said.

Judge Marengo did not respond to requests for comment.

Bergeron said "judges will not comment on their own decisions."


So... How to extricate that one?!

All in our only one world,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Speaking While Female.
Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant on Why Women Stay Quiet at Work

As this and other research shows, women who worry that talking “too much” will cause them to be disliked are not paranoid; they are often right.

Perhaps I should worry more about being liked, but I don't. Life is too short.

and

Men Just Don't Trust Women -- And It's A Huge Problem

Generally speaking, we (men) do not believe things when they're told to us by women. Well, women other than our mothers or teachers or any other woman who happens to be an established authority figure. Do we think women are pathological liars? No. But, does it generally take longer for us to believe something if a woman tells it to us than it would if a man told us the exact same thing? Definitely!

Something to think about, perhaps?

---

Reality Internet Personality

Speaking While Female.
Sheryl Sandberg and Adam Grant on Why Women Stay Quiet at Work

As this and other research shows, women who worry that talking “too much” will cause them to be disliked are not paranoid; they are often right.

Perhaps I should worry more about being liked, but I don't. Life is too short.

and

Men Just Don't Trust Women -- And It's A Huge Problem

Generally speaking, we (men) do not believe things when they're told to us by women. Well, women other than our mothers or teachers or any other woman who happens to be an established authority figure. Do we think women are pathological liars? No. But, does it generally take longer for us to believe something if a woman tells it to us than it would if a man told us the exact same thing? Definitely!

Something to think about, perhaps?

The Females, I was associated with, either in PD, or Educational Institutions, who spoke the most: I considered (mostly) to be among The Best. Same for males, including of course, myself.

The 'Don't Trust', is about personal relations. I also see this regarding women in these relationships.

Professionally... Same amount of trust/distrust, depending upon the individual. Not Gender.

What you are referring to is anecdotal evidence and your perception of what is going on.

However, the first article refers to several empirical studies that show that there is a measurable difference between how much time women are given to speak before they are shut down or talked over.

The second article is anecdotal (much like your example) however there is a study that shows that women are not trusted when it comes to giving business advice despite evidence that their advice is excellent. Investors don’t trust women, WUSTL study finds

---

Reality Internet Personality

However there is a study that shows that women are not trusted when it comes to giving business advice despite evidence that their advice is excellent. Investors don’t trust women, WUSTL study finds

Here companies from Stockholm cannot get contracts in Gothenburg (500 km apart).
Women or man doesn't matter.
But women have a big favour though.