Blogging is for discussion, not personal connections, self-promotion, advertising, or site support. To locate partners click Search and
To contact support, click HELP.
Posts may not include e-mails, telephone numbers, web sites, advertising, etc.
CustomerCareReading an article today: A 2010 Harvard study asked participants to evaluate fictional profiles for politicians. Participants thought "power-seeking" men were tougher and more competent than other men. Conversely, participants reacted to "power-seeking" women with "feelings of moral outrage": contempt, anger, and disgust. Except for gender, the actual profiles were identical.
astatineYou didn't mention whether the participants were male, female, young, old, rich, poor, clever, dunces, white, black... etc. It would be interesting to get some of each and analyse the data, even if the conclusion was that everybody feels the same way.
astatineVoting against a candidate solely because of their gender, makes no more or less sense than voting *for* a candidate on account of their gender. We could probably apply the same reasoning to voting based on race, religion, etc etc.
MilwaukeeProfInteresting and not fully surprising, yet ,as I keep reminding myself and my students,she won. Three million more people voted for her, even with Comey's hand on the scale,than voted for whatshisname.
shear37Among all the bad news lately there was a bit of surprising good news. In case anyone missed it Ringling Brothers will soon be no more. They will cease to exist. Years of protests, letter writing, convincing sponsors to drop them, educating the public, and so on has paid off. Last week Ringling Brothers credited pressure from animal rights activists for declining ticket sales making it impossible for them to survive financially. So as of May Ringling Brothers will play their last show EVER.
shear37There are so many reasons to fear/worry/despair about this election, from climate change and what we're doing to the natural world to how we treat each other whether as immigrants or providing healthcare.
Although I grew up during the Cold War, learned all the duck and cover crap, and was well informed about the dangers of nukes... the morning after the election of "he whose name we dare not utter out loud" is the first time in my life I felt genuine fear at the reality of a mutually assured destruction nuclear war. That's because Drumpf hasn't a clue.
During one foreign policy briefing he asked the experts advising him 3 times - if we have nukes why can't we use them. This brain damaged tyrant (no doubt a result of his losing the battle against STD's, which he describes as his own personal Vietnam) and an upbringing with too many silver spoons stuffed in his mouth (and up his nose) has no business controlling the fate of the earth. I don't like Pence, but let's hope the impeachment happens soon.
Hopefully a firm resistance, with a heavy helping of humor, will see us all through till that day we can finally start breathing again.
astatineThe question would perhaps be more useful if we turn it around - if we can't use nukes, why do we have them?
Obama was the least-embarrassing president y'all have had for as long as I can remember - and, sadly, for a little while yet to come. As a curious coincidence, although I am in no way a supporter, I also think Cameron was the least-bad PM we'd had for many a long year.
dragonfly422I see news that news Drumpf won't say yes to something that the rest of us don't want, but then a few hours later the news says that he ends up saying yes and the rest of us are left screaming "NO!"
astatineSo what was that then I missed it... Looking on the bright side, at least the appointment of the dude with the dead squirrel on his head, has finally united world opinion. The entire rest of the world, thinks he's a disgusting moron.