LightningZ71
LightningZ71
LightningZ71

I agree with your points about the article. I also find it disturbing that a woman is under threat of being silenced for speaking her mind on the subject of oppression of women. I also find it disturbing when most people are silenced from speaking their opinions on topics that aren’t deliberately inflammatory or

This response is to the thread in general and not solely to brigidd. I’d also like to point out that my intention is to have a quick look at the bigger picture here and not delve into the nuances of what makes a “woman”.

That’s the AWS wing of the Air Force operating the WC-130s. This is NOAA using their two remaining P-3 Orions (amed Kermit and Ms. Piggy). NASA/NOAA (depends on who it’s been trasnfered to that week) also has a Gulf Stream jet (named Gonzo) for doing high altitude synoptic reading flights around storms to get a better

It looks even better as the F-16xl. Couple the XL version with CFTs, the -v electronics package, the ACE engine and you’d have a fighter that’s better than the eurofighter typhoon and the grippen in every way. So even a modest low observability treatment on it and it’ll be right on the tail of the F-35 in most

Actually, the design for the Adv Super Hornet has it able to carry three of the “stealth weapons canoes” under it, one centerline and one under each wing. The wing hardpoints for the canoes are supposed to be modifications from the current super hornet design that straightens them out with respect to airflow as well.

If Canada is true about what it says is the reason that they want to cancel the F-35 purchase and re-evaluate the whole of their air fleet, than the F-15SE (silent eagle) package is really the best option based on range, time to intercept, air to air capability and other secondary factors. It will still retain its

I believe the only way that there will be real social justice here is for the SAG to really put their foot down and work out a labor agreement with each studio that not only covers scale, but also covers parity for anything above scale too. I fear that we’ll never see that because the people that it would hurt the

For all practical purposes, you couldn’t have said it better.

Well, there is a bit of a seniority grade in pay involved there too...

This is the absolute key to resolving this issue. The screen actors guild needs to step in here and collectively bargain a prevailing wage agreement, a seniority system that graduates pay, and a support system for the less compensated members that helps alleviate the struggle of getting started, which will make young

Sidestepping wether Bradly Cooper is just jumping on the bandwagon here to avoid a bunch of negative fallout, I would like to instead point the finger squarely at two parties that HAVE to have known about what’s been going on about Hollywood pay and doing next to nothing about it all along:

I think that everyone here is missing the point. Almost all of us have some sort of racist tendencies inside of us. It is largely a result of our socialization growing up, our family lives, the homogenization of the communities that we grew up and now live in, and at its basist levels on our genetically derived

But, doesn’t having a preference for one race in particular also indicate a negative bias against all other races? That leads to there being a selection criteria that is based at least in part on race, making it a race based prejudice which is the heart of being a racist.

Doesn’t a preference for one race indicate a negative bias against all other races, which is itself a form of racism?

But, she would then also be a racist in excercising a racial prejudice. Again, I’m not saying she is a bad person, just pointing out that she is a racist.

But aren’t you tgen talking about bigotry? Racism is just the word that encompases having a prejudice with respect to race. Bigotry is when it extends into unjust behavior. I don’t see many rational people in this comment thread espousing a belief that people that have a racial prejudice in their dating criteria are

But, if the selection criteria in any way included race as an exclusion, then there is a racial prejudice, and where there is a prejudice, by definition, there is racism.

If your selection criteria included rejecting potential partners based on race in any way, that is indication of an existing racial prejudice. By definition, that makes you a racist. That’s the harsh reality of the language.

Wether you say it out loud or not, if your selection criteria is the RACE of the other party, that is a racisl prejudice. If you have a racial prejudice in any way, you are, by definition, a racist. That fact is inescapable.

But this is semantically incorrect. If either one is really racism, then both are. The difference is one is defacto racism and the other is dejure. A prejudice is a prejudice, no matter how it is articulated. If the defining characteristic is wholely the RACE of the person that is being rejected, then it is racism.