Buy myambutol and Generic Ethambutol tablets online for respiratory tract. Available without prior prescription. Continue reading
Buy proscar and Generic Finasteride tablets online for mens health. Available without prior prescription. Continue reading
Buy cartia xt and Generic Diltiazem hcl tablets online for hypertension. Available without prior prescription. Continue reading
Buy advair rotacaps and Generic Fluticasone-salmeterol tablets online for respiratory tract. Available without prior prescription. Continue reading
Why Women Aren’t Welcome on the Internet by Amanda Hess at Pacific Standard
According to a 2005 report by the Pew Research Center, which has been tracking the online lives of Americans for more than a decade, women and men have been logging on in equal numbers since 2000, but the vilest communications are still disproportionately lobbed at women. We are more likely to report being stalked and harassed on the Internet — of the 3,787 people who reported harassing incidents from 2000 to 2012 to the volunteer organization Working to Halt Online Abuse, 72.5 percent were female. Sometimes, the abuse can get physical: A Pew survey reported that five percent of women who used the Internet said “something happened online” that led them into “physical danger.” And it starts young: Teenage girls are significantly more likely to be cyberbullied than boys. Just appearing as a woman online, it seems, can be enough to inspire abuse. In 2006, researchers from the University of Maryland set up a bunch of fake online accounts and then dispatched them into chat rooms. Accounts with feminine usernames incurred an average of 100 sexually explicit or threatening messages a day. Masculine names received 3.7.
Rape and Death Threats: What Men’s Rights Activists Really Look Like by Katie J.M. Baker at Jezebel
Men’s Rights Activists are rage-filled misogynists who claim feminists intentionally “cover up” issues like male rape and workplace injury rates so women can achieve global domination. Har. Those pesky feminazis, however, keep getting in the way, so it’s up to the MRAs to win the world over. And how do they do this? By threatening to “gag, rape and gut” bitches who dare to question their flimsy politics.
Swiss, 1741 — 1825
Oedipus Cursing His Son, Polynices, 1786
oil on canvas
Oh, Andrea Dworkin a review of Misogyny: The Male Malady by David Gilmore at the London Review of Books by Jenny Diski
… we can concentrate our thoughts and concerns on the real victims of the malady of misogyny: the psychogenically challenged male who needs all the understanding we can give him. Apparently men’s psyches are ‘troubled’, they are in ‘masculine turmoil’ as a result of universal experiences in ‘the male developmental cycle’. Lord, how easily the image of the oppressed is appropriated. If women think they’ve had a hard time as a result of being loathed and bullied by men, it’s nothing compared to the hardship suffered by men that has resulted in their feeling the loathing. If you are beginning to get an uncomfortable sense of milky mothers and moist mermaids looming on the horizon you are right, because men’s fear of helplessness, suffocation and submergence, in the inescapably female and deliquescent form of uterus, breast and vagina, is judged to be at the root of it all. Women drip with danger for men, who, as we know, first can’t live without us and then can’t live with us. You can love your mother for a while, but then she betrays you with your father and you have to marry other men’s sisters: enemies, outsiders, who as like as not are plotting against you with their sexuality and secretions while trying to abort your sons on whom the patriliny depends. Of course, it’s not women’s fault that it’s all their fault – Gilmore has all the rhetoric of a modern man and throws his hands up sadly at the unfortunate social and biological arrangements that make it this way – but men suffer from having been given birth to by women from whom they have to separate in order to become men; they suffer from having to desire people of the same gender as their mother (my, this is very awkward, Jocasta), and they suffer because they cannot perform the miracle of reproducing the species directly from their own bodies. Men suffer. No, they do. It’s awful.
Corbin on “Abortion Distortions” via Feminist Law Professors
Two types of distortions often arise in abortion jurisprudence. The first is distortion of scientific fact. Too often abortion opponents distort medical facts and courts accept those distortions as true. Take, for example, the claim that abortion makes women depressed and suicidal. In fact, no reputable study supports any such causal link. Equally without scientific foundation is the claim that morning after pills like Plan B act as abortifacients. They do not.
The second kind of distortion that occurs in abortion jurisprudence is that the normal doctrine does not apply. Thus, despite the fact that compelling someone to articulate the government’s ideology is anathema in free speech jurisprudence, courts have upheld mandatory abortion counseling laws that force doctors to serve as mouthpieces for the state’s viewpoint. Similarly, despite the fact that for-profit corporations have never been held to have religious rights, several courts have stayed application of the new contraception mandate on the grounds that it might violate the corporation’s conscience.” This abortion exceptionalism is problematic for women and for First Amendment jurisprudence.
Abortion exceptionalism means the rules are different for abortion cases. Instead of rejecting baseless scientific claims, courts rely on them. Instead of applying existing First Amendment jurisprudence, courts ignore fundamental principles or distort them beyond recognition. Consequently, false claims about abortion have justified mandatory counseling laws, and mistaken claims about morning-after pills have allowed for-profit corporations to avoid the contraception mandate. These distortions not only impede women’s reproductive rights but also result in highly problematic precedents. Indeed, the willingness to bend the rules when it comes to abortion may result in a jurisprudence where for-profit corporations are entitled to religious exemptions, even when the exemption burdens the corporation’s (whole, separate, unique living human being) employees.
You can download the paper 31 pages) for free here.
We Didn’t Eat the Marshmallow. The Marshmallow Ate Us. by Michael Bourne in the New York Times
The tale of the marshmallows, as presented in Goleman’s book, read like some science-age Calvinist parable. Was I one of the elect, I wondered, a child blessed with the moral fortitude to resist temptation? Or was I doomed from age 4 to a life of impulse-driven gluttony?
Clearly I’m not alone in this reaction. Search for “marshmallow experiment” on YouTube, and you’ll find page after page of home-video versions of the experiment in which 4-year-olds struggle not to eat a marshmallow. The marshmallow study has been the subject of TED talks. The New Yorker published a long article about it. Radiolab did a show on it.
If you doubt the ubiquity of the Mischel study, try this simple experiment: Put a few social-policy geeks in a room and ask them about willpower, then see how long it takes before somebody brings up the 4-year-olds and the marshmallows. My bet is you wouldn’t have to wait more than a minute or two.
The marshmallow study captured the public imagination because it is a funny story, easily told, that appears to reduce the complex social and psychological question of why some people succeed in life to a simple, if ancient, formulation: Character is destiny. Except that in this case, the formulation isn’t coming from the Greek philosopher Heraclitus or from a minister preaching that “patience is a virtue” but from science, that most modern of popular religions.