I believe we call that "damning with faint praise."
Seconded. The shortage right now really makes me nervous.
In my honest opinion, there IS room, in the general sense, for a discussion about sexual harassment-- how it is approached, how it has evolved, and the general public sentiment surrounding it. Do I personally believe that there's an oversensitivity issue at work w/r/t sexual harassment in the modern workplace? No, of course not. But as far as I can tell, plenty of people do, and I think that if there's actual reasoning there then the topic is one that merits a larger dialogue/conversation.
This has been done right a few times--see, for example, The West Wing's Ainsley Hayes on sexual harassment/workplace advances--in ways that introduce new points of view without reducing the other side to idiocy/oversensitivity/noise. I think that's what made Roiphe's piece so disappointing for me: the space she's occupying doesn't introduce anything new or constructive, and it bears some pretty uncomfortable parallels to the space Katy Perry occupies (occupied?) in pop music.
There's room for opposing viewpoints, and I think that there's legitimate fodder for discussion. This just isn't it.
This has been done right a few times--see, for example, The West Wing's Ainsley Hayes on sexual harassment/workplace advances--in ways that introduce new points of view without reducing the other side to idiocy/oversensitivity/noise. I think that's what made Roiphe's piece so disappointing for me: the space she's occupying doesn't introduce anything new or constructive, and it bears some pretty uncomfortable parallels to the space Katy Perry occupies (occupied?) in pop music.
There's room for opposing viewpoints, and I think that there's legitimate fodder for discussion. This just isn't it.
Pretty sure I recognize that wine. And if I'm correct, then just allow me to say-- if one is going to binge-drink a wine, that one is DEFINITELY a good choice.
If buying flowers = a sorry stunt, I really hate to think about how low a bar my exes have set.
Yeah. Well I mean, it's the cycle of abuse, isn't it? That vacillation that some couples have between extreme highs and lows. I'm not saying that's what's happening here by any means--and hopefully it isn't-- but it is a pretty recognizable dynamic.
And yeah, if the message was just deleted with no correction or anything, that raises a couple red flags as well.
And yeah, if the message was just deleted with no correction or anything, that raises a couple red flags as well.
I hate to be cynical, but-- am I the only one who suspects that maybe the Rihanna tweet wasn't a hoax or a hacker? That maybe she posted it impulsively, and then realized what an absolutely stupid/faily thing it was to say? I dunno, I would be a lot more likely to think it was a fakeout if there hadn't been something on here a few days back about Brown messaging her via Twitter and sending her pictures....
In fairness though, if there isn't a sweeping company policy (like, in writing) that explicitly discriminates against women, then it IS sort of hard to prove that all of these women were discriminated against in exactly the same way, or for the same reason(s). If I understood the analysis I read correctly, the four Justices who dissented believed that the gender bias was obvious within the company culture, and that this was more important than the actual written policy on discrimination.
That line did make me cringe, though. Like, a lot. Even just saying that there wasn't an official policy advocating discrimination would have been better.
My main issue with the decision is its potential effect on corporate culture. The message it kind of seems to be sending is that the more decentralized a company is, and the more ambiguous its policies, the more difficult it will be to bring a class action suit against it. Which seems pretty messed up, IMHO.
That line did make me cringe, though. Like, a lot. Even just saying that there wasn't an official policy advocating discrimination would have been better.
My main issue with the decision is its potential effect on corporate culture. The message it kind of seems to be sending is that the more decentralized a company is, and the more ambiguous its policies, the more difficult it will be to bring a class action suit against it. Which seems pretty messed up, IMHO.
Ohhh yes, absolutely. I'm not into sports either (and I have two brothers who are jocks), but it's easily one of my favorite shows. Just amazing characters, story lines, treatment of big topics, etc.
Friday Night Lights?
V.Mars!
For some reason, I feel like there's a good quote by Tennessee Williams that sums up these sentiments. I'll try to think of it!
Tis the season for the self-consciousness stuff. But I second what tasterainbows said-- screw the butch/femme labels! Wear what you want, that's what makes you, you, as opposed to an archetype or stereotype. Besides, it's Pride Month. So if people aren't going to be accepting of others' sexuality, gender expression, and personal style, they can shove it.
As someone who's gone through something similar, I have a few thoughts-- though I don't know if any of them will be of help to you. My brother's a little younger (early 20's), but he went through a bit of a phase this way, too. For him, I think it was more of a response to his environment when he went away to school than anything else, but it's hard to be sure.
At any rate. My efforts to steer or influence him through subtle disapproval kind of failed-- I would just sort of give him looks or make non passive-aggressive asides when he said stupid things, and I basically wound up looking like a wet blanket or a killjoy. What did work, however, was talking to him in a way that pretty clearly wasn't designed to manipulate him about my own life and experiences. He has something of a protective instinct, and my talking to him--for no other apparent reason than to vent to someone--about men who objectify women, douchebag boyfriends/ex-boyfriends/girlfriends, and general cultural pressure on women to fit an unrealistic stereotype, helped a lot. It wasn't an overnight thing, but I do believe that that, in conjunction with his getting a good girlfriend who called him on his crap, did him a world of good.
Not sure how your relationship with your brother is, so not sure that'll help you. But turning the "objectifying women" instinct onto women that certain men care about can help them gain clarity, I think.
Good luck!
At any rate. My efforts to steer or influence him through subtle disapproval kind of failed-- I would just sort of give him looks or make non passive-aggressive asides when he said stupid things, and I basically wound up looking like a wet blanket or a killjoy. What did work, however, was talking to him in a way that pretty clearly wasn't designed to manipulate him about my own life and experiences. He has something of a protective instinct, and my talking to him--for no other apparent reason than to vent to someone--about men who objectify women, douchebag boyfriends/ex-boyfriends/girlfriends, and general cultural pressure on women to fit an unrealistic stereotype, helped a lot. It wasn't an overnight thing, but I do believe that that, in conjunction with his getting a good girlfriend who called him on his crap, did him a world of good.
Not sure how your relationship with your brother is, so not sure that'll help you. But turning the "objectifying women" instinct onto women that certain men care about can help them gain clarity, I think.
Good luck!
I heard that Kristin Wiig made "fetch" happen.
I heard that Kristin Wiig met John Stamos on a plane and he told her she was pretty.
I love this-- and the rest of his comments on the decision are pretty awesome, as well.
Only one more vote is needed for the bill to have the majority vote, and Greg Ball (one of the GOP holdouts) just posted on Twitter, essentially asking whether he should vote yes or no.
LET'S GO NEW YORK!
Only one more vote is needed for the bill to have the majority vote, and Greg Ball (one of the GOP holdouts) just posted on Twitter, essentially asking whether he should vote yes or no.
LET'S GO NEW YORK!
I want him as Enjolras.
Right. And once the sale is made, she's sort of screwed-- there are really no grounds to punish the media for disseminating the tape, much less to stop them from doing it in the first place.
I certainly wouldn't argue that it's tasteful, but I'd say it's definitely permissible by many, if not most, journalistic codes of ethics. It isn't crucial information for the public to know in terms of national security or anything, but I do think that there's some value in fleshing out (no pun intended) as complete a picture as possible when it comes to figures such as bin Laden. Like cassiebear said, this does kind of reveal an additional aspect of his mentality, or at least casts what we already know in a different light.
In terms of inciting hostility among his followers.. I mean, they're already pretty pissed off with us. I'm not sure this is going to make a huge difference in their desire (or ability) to retaliate. Ideally this particular revelation would be presented with a little more restraint, but I also think that the public (or at least some of the public) is ALWAYS going to want juicy details about this kind of person/event.
In terms of inciting hostility among his followers.. I mean, they're already pretty pissed off with us. I'm not sure this is going to make a huge difference in their desire (or ability) to retaliate. Ideally this particular revelation would be presented with a little more restraint, but I also think that the public (or at least some of the public) is ALWAYS going to want juicy details about this kind of person/event.
