verjesh1
Jan 7, 12:03 AM
This Christmas I have gotten a nice mobile fro my father I was very happy because first time My father gave me better gift for me. so I am so happy.
Otaillon
Feb 7, 06:36 PM
On my external monitor
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6985/capturedcran20110207192.png
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6985/capturedcran20110207192.png
MrVegas
Aug 1, 10:30 AM
Do the .mac accounts have FTPS capability?
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. :)
spicyapple
Nov 29, 11:55 AM
I don't like the idea. The moment they start chipping away at devices, it'll set a bad precedent for future negotiations. It'll be hard to get back those rights. Apple, hold strong!! :)
dark knight
Apr 7, 06:59 PM
i know this would require different licensing deals but, assuming that most people will have similar collections of commercially available songs on their ipods, surely apple would not have to keep different instance of the same mater in each users imaginary allocated space.
just get apple to serve you music it knows that you own. admittedly this would stop working for totally individual content.
as a side note i have simply no idea if people actually get round to listening to the 10's of GB's of songs they have on their ipods! when your library total playtime is in years, you have too much music.
just get apple to serve you music it knows that you own. admittedly this would stop working for totally individual content.
as a side note i have simply no idea if people actually get round to listening to the 10's of GB's of songs they have on their ipods! when your library total playtime is in years, you have too much music.
lynnequintana
Feb 4, 01:42 AM
here's mine for the month of February :rolleyes:
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k502/lynnequintana/bg-desktop.png
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k502/lynnequintana/bg-desktop.png
Archon Gold
Apr 24, 03:02 PM
It probably just means that the iMac is not functional, as in Apple Technicians made it out of spare parts.
macgeek18
Dec 26, 12:06 AM
As of today, I worked a full 7 hours shift and an hour of over time. By making time and a half the first 7 hours and time and a half to the time and a half for the 1 hour the next paycheck will be REALLY nice. I think I shall buy an Apple TV.
:D
:D
aiqw9182
Mar 23, 10:03 AM
A glass eye with a rose color lens... :rolleyes:
Ocular prosthesis/glass eye/artificial eye
They all have the same meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocular_prosthesis
Ocular prosthesis/glass eye/artificial eye
They all have the same meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocular_prosthesis
treecoin
Apr 26, 02:13 AM
Hi
I want to convert pdf files to flash files with animations like flipping pages etc., buttons for zoom. And better works on MacOS.
any software or component works for that?
I want to convert pdf files to flash files with animations like flipping pages etc., buttons for zoom. And better works on MacOS.
any software or component works for that?
bradl
Apr 13, 07:27 PM
Oh silly gays when will you learn. ;)but yeah if a white person called me a n word i'd be mad so the same applies here. I'd be pissed if someone called me a bundle of stocks. :D
If a white person called you the N word, you should be examining your tolerance in their ignorance as well as their ignorance. You shouldn't be so quick to react, because they are looking for that reaction out of you; that is why they call you it. It could be said that you are living up to the slur that you are being called.
Disclaimer: I'm also Black. I don't let the word get to me because it empowers them if I show any reaction to it that doesn't benefit me.
Back on topic though.. the F word.. what were to happen if you were overseas (the UK, for example), and someone uses the F word while drawing a puff from the Camel or Marlboro in their mouth. Would you be so quick to judge and react then?
BL.
If a white person called you the N word, you should be examining your tolerance in their ignorance as well as their ignorance. You shouldn't be so quick to react, because they are looking for that reaction out of you; that is why they call you it. It could be said that you are living up to the slur that you are being called.
Disclaimer: I'm also Black. I don't let the word get to me because it empowers them if I show any reaction to it that doesn't benefit me.
Back on topic though.. the F word.. what were to happen if you were overseas (the UK, for example), and someone uses the F word while drawing a puff from the Camel or Marlboro in their mouth. Would you be so quick to judge and react then?
BL.
Shivetya
Apr 8, 04:42 AM
Some of the customer reviews on the iTunes download page are very critical of the controls for some games. Not sure how well they've ported these to the touch screen interface....
Depends on if you look further than the displayed controls. By that I mean, with Tempest there is a slider on the left that lets you rotate around the play field and firing buttons on the right. However, what many miss is that you can control the entire movement around the screen by touch.
Same for centipede/millipede/etc. Apparently most have a simulated control on the screen but they also have touch capability for movement control on the game surface as well.
Depends on if you look further than the displayed controls. By that I mean, with Tempest there is a slider on the left that lets you rotate around the play field and firing buttons on the right. However, what many miss is that you can control the entire movement around the screen by touch.
Same for centipede/millipede/etc. Apparently most have a simulated control on the screen but they also have touch capability for movement control on the game surface as well.
hopejr
Apr 1, 07:42 AM
Went to this expo yesterday, it wasnt bad, not as good as I thought it would be. Mainly computer shops, some game shops, a massive 600+ LAN fest, etc.
took a few snaps, on my blog:
http://www.invertedreality.com/
I missed it :( . I heard about it but didn't know when it was on until yesterday, and I had other things planned for today. Oh well.
took a few snaps, on my blog:
http://www.invertedreality.com/
I missed it :( . I heard about it but didn't know when it was on until yesterday, and I had other things planned for today. Oh well.
AdrianK
Apr 16, 05:11 AM
Thought I'd try something a little different :P
http://d.pr/3G36+
Tiger wallpaper, dock images, iTunes 6 icon, Tiger Terminal and System Preferences icons.
http://d.pr/3G36+
Tiger wallpaper, dock images, iTunes 6 icon, Tiger Terminal and System Preferences icons.
Mackilroy
Mar 17, 03:18 PM
It installed fine on the Mac Pro I have lying around.
hansiedejong
Oct 14, 08:31 AM
http://i55.tinypic.com/2eec7wz.png
munkle
Feb 14, 12:54 PM
If it is a complaint by mymemory does it really matter? :D
Good point ;)
Good point ;)
OWCMichael
May 3, 04:03 PM
That particular enclosure uses one eSATA port for each drive in the enclosure. You certainly could put only your 2TB drive into it and use that drive by itself, but you would not be able to daisy chain to another enclosure.
darwen
Feb 9, 01:28 PM
I'm suspicious of the TO any mobile. Does it differentiate incoming from outgoing?
DeusInvictus7
Dec 2, 01:02 AM
haaylaviit!can you share a link please?thanks
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs29/f/2008/133/c/7/Avengers_by_JPRart.jpg
There you go :D
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs29/f/2008/133/c/7/Avengers_by_JPRart.jpg
There you go :D
rmwebs
Apr 6, 04:04 PM
Clearly the new DC wont be serving up iTunes content if they are using an external storage provider...making the article stupidly misleading to many folks.
This must mean the DC will be primarily for MobileMe. Resulting in the continuation of crap iDisk performance for Apples largest audience: Anyone outside the US.
This must mean the DC will be primarily for MobileMe. Resulting in the continuation of crap iDisk performance for Apples largest audience: Anyone outside the US.
Reefbone
Feb 10, 12:50 PM
I have the 450 minute plan for $29.99. Kinda worried I won't be able to do this. I see mention of people on the same plan for $39.99 and that price point being one of the qualifiers.
UPDATE: Spoke to ATT: If I add the unlimited M2M then I lose my Corporate discount... I'm kinda torn as I have been steadily blowing through my rollovers minute this past year. I started with close to 2000 minutes of rollover and am down to only 50mins left. I would have to spend $15 more per month to the the feature but @.45/min over 450 it could get ugly quick. Torn...
UPDATE: Spoke to ATT: If I add the unlimited M2M then I lose my Corporate discount... I'm kinda torn as I have been steadily blowing through my rollovers minute this past year. I started with close to 2000 minutes of rollover and am down to only 50mins left. I would have to spend $15 more per month to the the feature but @.45/min over 450 it could get ugly quick. Torn...
AP_piano295
Mar 18, 02:56 PM
I know right? Christians are totally equivalent in women's clothing to Muslims. I mean, asking for the skirts to be to their knees, for them to not see midriff, or parts of the breast is totally equivalent to making the wear burkhas. And then there is the audacity to ask for them to not be exposed to butt crack on the beach, simply appalling their curtailing of freedom!
Congratulations on so thoroughly missing the point.
Congratulations on so thoroughly missing the point.
No comments:
Post a Comment