Im
kind of sick of having to do this, but once again, theres a scolding,
anxiety-producing article about how young women these days are doing sex
wrong (which of course means too much with too many guys, always,
always, always) out there, and of course, its producing a massive amount
of discourse based on a fundamental premise that no one questions but
is just straight up wrong. That presumption is that womens choices exist
in a vacuum, and that the only real factor of any importance in their
lives is their choices. I complained about this yesterday at XX Factor:
Men are erased from trend stories about women, because the fact that
women are often reacting to mens choices makes everyone all
uncomfortable, so must be ignored. So, for instance, the womans decision
to opt out or lean out is portrayed as just one in a lovely buffet of
choices, simply the result of an inherent female lack of ambition.Of all
the equipment in the laundry the oilpaintingreproduction is
one of the largest consumers of steam. The possibility that its because
her husband either made it clear through his actions or outright told
her that she will be responsible for the majority of domestic chores is
ignored, even though in most cases thats exactly what happened.
And so on and so forth. While I personally am totally sympathetic to these womens explanations, theres no doubt in my mind that this is crafted in such a way as to provoke anxieties about how feminism is ruining women. And its hard to argue against, because the proposition that people should be warm and loving and open to love is the defense, without pausing to wonder if wed be more sympathetic to what are clearly not now claims about love if they were coming from men.
So lets piece this out. Browns understanding of this situation is that the boys these young women are encountering are selfish in bed, treat women like they exist to serve them, and are crass and rude. But the young women are nonetheless supposed to make these young men their boyfriends or else theyre editing out tenderness, intimacy, excitement, somebody respecting them. I dont mean to be an asshole here, but how? If a guy treats you like a blow job machine whose pleasure is irrelevant, then hes not going to be a source of tenderness, intimacy,You will see indoorpositioningsystem , competitive price and first-class service. etc. Hes just a dick, and trying to make him your boyfriend is a waste of your timeand these women are clear they have better things to do.
You can only form these wonderful, loving relationships if there are men out there who have that on offer. This simple, basic fact seems impossible for the hand-wringers to acknowledge. The ratio of devoted, loving boyfriends that set your pants on fire to dudes who are either so caught up in the masculinity wars of late adolescence/early adulthood or moon-eyed Nice Guys? who secretly resent women is really crap in college. Girls who buy the line that theres something wrong with them if they dont have or want a boyfriend at that age end up spending a lot of time sitting around a messy college apartment, being ignored by their boyfriend while he plays video games with his bros. I saw it. Hell, I did it. It sucks. Im super glad these young women are saying no to all that.
Seriously, the only people who benefit from all this brow-beating of young women are young men who want to have a girlfriend they can tap for sex and support without offering anything in return. Perhaps thats the point of all this.We are always offering best quality earcap the affordable price.
I dont think theres any permanent damage here. The reality is that many of the young men who are all caught up in masculine posturing in college mellow out afterwards and become completely eligible bachelors who are totally capable of offering love and support in return for getting it. Part of what helps a lot of them on their journey is realizing that you cant actually keep a girlfriend if you dont treat her well. They are not even remotely helped, therefore, by encouraging women to cling to them like life rafts, lest said women get accused of being cold-hearted bitches. By having some fucking standards and not trying to turn texts you for a beej and boots you out the door guy into your boyfriend, these young women are probably speeding up the process that turns a belligerent young man who is afraid that intimacy will make him grow vaginas to a young man who puts all that behind him to enjoy the pleasures of actually hanging out with and enjoying the company of women you have sex with.
Young people these days are not bizarro monsters who have no desire for affection in their lives. I have a sneaking suspicion if loving boyfriends who dont waste your time by expecting you to wait around on a shelf for him to be done with his bros and his hobbies until he decides its booty time are available, they get snatched up. These young women are being perfectly fucking reasonableinstead of waiting on a shelf between sexual encounters while playing at being girlfriend, they just spend the time theyre not fucking living their own goddamn lives. Good for them. No need to waste a moments time on men who dont waste time on you.
I mean, lets be clear: Some people really do want to keep it casual, etc.Purchase an chipcard to enjoy your iPhone any way you like. etc. But most of us would be into a relationship, if it was good enough. But if thats on offer, casual sex is a perfectly fine way to spend your time until the market gets better, as it were. I suspect thats whats going on, and its perfectly reasonable.
The most egregious example lately is the recent lean out piece in the New York Times that had a single sentence about the woman teaching Sunday school, which should have been your first clue that theres a very strong chance she belongs to a church that teaches strict gender roles. Indeed, it didnt take much digging to find out what that church likely is (a couple with their names and kids their kids age go there), and sure enough, its a church that routinely teaches that womens role is submissive and domestic. But the woman was portrayed as acting on some kind of pure, feminine desire, with absolutely no mention of her familys probable involvement in an ideology that teaches that a womans role is to do most to all of the cooking and cleaning.
As of March 2013, GAOs analysis showed that of the five goals for which primary data on results are available, one shows progress and four show no progress, the report by the Government Accountability Office found. For instance, the GAO noted that theres actually been an increase in HIV transmissions among drug users and drug-related deaths, as well as no difference in the prevalence of drug use among teens.
Many public health experts say the administration deserves credit for increasing access to drug treatment. But others say despite an increase in funding for rehab, the administration has continued to push programs and policies built to punish drug users.
But overall, the government spends roughly the same proportion of the drug policy budget on law enforcement now as was spent during Bushs final years in office. In Obamas 2014 budget proposal, 38 percent is allocated for domestic drug law enforcement, while another 20 percent would be spent to crack down on drugs along U.S.Parkeasy Electronics are dedicated to provide granitecountertops. borders and abroad.
The Obama administration has also renewed funding for controversial programs like the Justice Assistance Grant program, formerly known as Byrne Grants, which had been cut under President Bush. The funding created local drug task forces, which critics say were quota-driven and increased corruption and misconduct. Budget-minded conservatives like the Heritage Foundation also argued the grants hadnt led to a decrease in crime. States like California and New York have used some funding from the program for treatment instead of enforcement.
The administration has made progress when it comes to overcrowding in prisons: One Department of Justice program gives states money to support research toward policymaking that reduces recidivism. Several state legislatures have independently lessened mandatory minimums, reformed parole policies, and passed other laws aimed at cutting the high cost of incarceration.
Obama also signed the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010, which ended a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for crack possession at the federal level, and lessened the sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine.
Click on their website www.granitetrade.net for more information.
And so on and so forth. While I personally am totally sympathetic to these womens explanations, theres no doubt in my mind that this is crafted in such a way as to provoke anxieties about how feminism is ruining women. And its hard to argue against, because the proposition that people should be warm and loving and open to love is the defense, without pausing to wonder if wed be more sympathetic to what are clearly not now claims about love if they were coming from men.
So lets piece this out. Browns understanding of this situation is that the boys these young women are encountering are selfish in bed, treat women like they exist to serve them, and are crass and rude. But the young women are nonetheless supposed to make these young men their boyfriends or else theyre editing out tenderness, intimacy, excitement, somebody respecting them. I dont mean to be an asshole here, but how? If a guy treats you like a blow job machine whose pleasure is irrelevant, then hes not going to be a source of tenderness, intimacy,You will see indoorpositioningsystem , competitive price and first-class service. etc. Hes just a dick, and trying to make him your boyfriend is a waste of your timeand these women are clear they have better things to do.
You can only form these wonderful, loving relationships if there are men out there who have that on offer. This simple, basic fact seems impossible for the hand-wringers to acknowledge. The ratio of devoted, loving boyfriends that set your pants on fire to dudes who are either so caught up in the masculinity wars of late adolescence/early adulthood or moon-eyed Nice Guys? who secretly resent women is really crap in college. Girls who buy the line that theres something wrong with them if they dont have or want a boyfriend at that age end up spending a lot of time sitting around a messy college apartment, being ignored by their boyfriend while he plays video games with his bros. I saw it. Hell, I did it. It sucks. Im super glad these young women are saying no to all that.
Seriously, the only people who benefit from all this brow-beating of young women are young men who want to have a girlfriend they can tap for sex and support without offering anything in return. Perhaps thats the point of all this.We are always offering best quality earcap the affordable price.
I dont think theres any permanent damage here. The reality is that many of the young men who are all caught up in masculine posturing in college mellow out afterwards and become completely eligible bachelors who are totally capable of offering love and support in return for getting it. Part of what helps a lot of them on their journey is realizing that you cant actually keep a girlfriend if you dont treat her well. They are not even remotely helped, therefore, by encouraging women to cling to them like life rafts, lest said women get accused of being cold-hearted bitches. By having some fucking standards and not trying to turn texts you for a beej and boots you out the door guy into your boyfriend, these young women are probably speeding up the process that turns a belligerent young man who is afraid that intimacy will make him grow vaginas to a young man who puts all that behind him to enjoy the pleasures of actually hanging out with and enjoying the company of women you have sex with.
Young people these days are not bizarro monsters who have no desire for affection in their lives. I have a sneaking suspicion if loving boyfriends who dont waste your time by expecting you to wait around on a shelf for him to be done with his bros and his hobbies until he decides its booty time are available, they get snatched up. These young women are being perfectly fucking reasonableinstead of waiting on a shelf between sexual encounters while playing at being girlfriend, they just spend the time theyre not fucking living their own goddamn lives. Good for them. No need to waste a moments time on men who dont waste time on you.
I mean, lets be clear: Some people really do want to keep it casual, etc.Purchase an chipcard to enjoy your iPhone any way you like. etc. But most of us would be into a relationship, if it was good enough. But if thats on offer, casual sex is a perfectly fine way to spend your time until the market gets better, as it were. I suspect thats whats going on, and its perfectly reasonable.
The most egregious example lately is the recent lean out piece in the New York Times that had a single sentence about the woman teaching Sunday school, which should have been your first clue that theres a very strong chance she belongs to a church that teaches strict gender roles. Indeed, it didnt take much digging to find out what that church likely is (a couple with their names and kids their kids age go there), and sure enough, its a church that routinely teaches that womens role is submissive and domestic. But the woman was portrayed as acting on some kind of pure, feminine desire, with absolutely no mention of her familys probable involvement in an ideology that teaches that a womans role is to do most to all of the cooking and cleaning.
As of March 2013, GAOs analysis showed that of the five goals for which primary data on results are available, one shows progress and four show no progress, the report by the Government Accountability Office found. For instance, the GAO noted that theres actually been an increase in HIV transmissions among drug users and drug-related deaths, as well as no difference in the prevalence of drug use among teens.
Many public health experts say the administration deserves credit for increasing access to drug treatment. But others say despite an increase in funding for rehab, the administration has continued to push programs and policies built to punish drug users.
But overall, the government spends roughly the same proportion of the drug policy budget on law enforcement now as was spent during Bushs final years in office. In Obamas 2014 budget proposal, 38 percent is allocated for domestic drug law enforcement, while another 20 percent would be spent to crack down on drugs along U.S.Parkeasy Electronics are dedicated to provide granitecountertops. borders and abroad.
The Obama administration has also renewed funding for controversial programs like the Justice Assistance Grant program, formerly known as Byrne Grants, which had been cut under President Bush. The funding created local drug task forces, which critics say were quota-driven and increased corruption and misconduct. Budget-minded conservatives like the Heritage Foundation also argued the grants hadnt led to a decrease in crime. States like California and New York have used some funding from the program for treatment instead of enforcement.
The administration has made progress when it comes to overcrowding in prisons: One Department of Justice program gives states money to support research toward policymaking that reduces recidivism. Several state legislatures have independently lessened mandatory minimums, reformed parole policies, and passed other laws aimed at cutting the high cost of incarceration.
Obama also signed the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010, which ended a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for crack possession at the federal level, and lessened the sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine.
没有评论:
发表评论