Ybisk

We want to be able to wrap up Porn4Jews and give it to the Jews and goyim we love! We are working on turning it into a book and are accepting any and all inquiries at porn4jews@gmail.com.

Great maps that show you the etymology of words in Europese languages.
Interesting stuff right?

Republicans tend to be Second Amendment absolutists.  The NRA and their representatives in Congress haven’t yet weighed in on the specific issue of, say, banning assault rifles in LAX, but they just might argue that such a law would be an unconstitutional infringement of the right to bear arms.

The  First Amendment begins, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” and when it comes to the Establishment Clause, Republican ideas become a bit more nuanced.  Here are the results of a recent YouGov survey.  The question was, “Would you favor or oppose establishing Christianity as the official state religion in your state?”

Democrats and Independents oppose the establishment of Christianity – “strongly oppose” is their modal response.  But a majority of Republicans favor making their state a Christian state, and of those, most (two-thirds) are in the “strongly favor” pew.

This is not to say that Republicans are unaware of the Establishment Clause.  “Based on what you know, would you think that states are permitted by the constitution to establish official state religions, or not?”

Republicans are slightly more likely than Democrats to say that the Constitution does not permit state religions.  They just think that on this one, the framers of the Constitution got it wrong.

Republicans are only a bit less enthusiastic about establishing Christianity as the official religion of the entire country.  “Would you favor or oppose a Constitutional amendment which would make Christianity the official religion of the United States?”

A plurality, 46% – almost a majority – want to correct the Framers’ careless omission by amending the Constitution.  We can’t know specifically what the people who favor this have in mind. Republicans themselves probably differ in their ideas. Maybe only symbolic gestures, like invoking Jesus’s blessing on public events. Maybe public indoctrination – requiring Christian prayer and Bible reading in the public schools. Or maybe more tangible forms of support – giving taxpayers’ money directly to Christian organizations for explicitly religious purposes.

In any case, this is an interesting piece of data to keep in mind for next time a representative of the political right argues that the Constitution is unamendable and inflexible.

Cross-posted at Montclair SocioBlog.

Jay Livingston is the chair of the Sociology Department at Montclair State University. You can follow him at Montclair SocioBlog or on Twitter.

(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

HOW I IMAGINED IT:

THE REALITY:

credit: Josh

Amazon introduced a new program today called AmazonSmile, which will automatically donate 0.5% of your purchases to the charity you select. It costs you (and the charitable organizations) nothing, and it's just like shopping on Amazon normally, but you get to do a world of good.

Read more...

edwardspoonhands:

thankstank:

Well Hank the fish has some roommates finally. Everyone seems to be doing pretty well. Gigi is definitely the diva of the bunch. Grant Patterson is very shy and likes to hide behind the filter. Baltazar and Orion are trouble. They like to stick together and cause mischief. Magnus seems to have a crush on Gigi. Who doesn’t? Oyster very fast and doesn’t seem to have time to waste on the other fish. Finally that leaves Yonathan. Yonathan is pretty cool. All the fish seem to want to be his friend. Question is does Yonathan want to be theirs. Only time will tell. We have to wait 10 days before the next batch of friends move in. Stay tuned. 

The SciShow ThanksTank gets its first update. Baltazar and Orion are indeed trouble…I think Magnus is my favorite.

Thanks to a tweet from sociologist Sarah Sobieraj, we learned of a powerful campaign to raise awareness about gender inequality from the arm of the United Nations dedicated to empowering women.  The designers of the ads did Google searches, allowing the auto-complete to fill in word stems with the most commonly searched phrases.  The results are eyebrow-raising.

I was curious to find out what my personal Google machine would spit out and, also, what the equivalent searches for men would return.  Below, I reproduce the ads, followed by my own results.  Eyebrow-raising.  As a bonus, I did the searches for feminists.

I guess we still need feminism.  Unfortunately…

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

credit: sschaef23

Blind iPhone users now have a new tool with which to see the world thanks to the Singapore Association of the Visually Handicapped and developer StarHub. It's called MySmartEye, and it's a fairly simple concept: Visually impaired users snap photos with the app which are then uploaded to a massive gallery that sighted volunteers can browse. These "microvolunteers," as the app calls them, describe each photo in detail. That description is then read back to the user who took the photo using the app's built-in text-to-speech feature.

The app is brand new, so at the moment there's not a whole lot of activity, but it could turn into something big if both visually handicapped users and a sizable number of volunteers meet. If you're interested in helping out -- or you or someone you know could benefit from the app -- it's available for free on the App Store.

[via Springwise]

iPhone app helps blind users see the world around them originally appeared on TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Source | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Honk honk!

Trigger warning: Graphic descriptions of sexual assault.

Robin Thicke’s summer hit Blurred Lines addresses what he considers to be sounds like a grey area between consensual sex and assault. The images in this post place the song into a real-life context.  They are from Project Unbreakable, an online photo essay exhibit, and feature images of women and men holding signs with sentences that their rapist said before, during, or after their assault.   Let’s begin.

I know you want it.

Thicke sings “I know you want it,” a phrase that many sexual assault survivors report their rapists saying to justify their actions, as demonstrated over and over in the Project Unbreakable testimonials.

You’re a good girl.

Thicke further sings “You’re a good girl,” suggesting that a good girl won’t show her reciprocal desire (if it exists). This becomes further proof in his mind that she wants sex: for good girls, silence is consent and “no” really means “yes.”

Calling an adult a “good girl” in this context resonates with the the virgin/whore dichotomy. The implication in Blurred Lines is that because the woman is not responding to a man’s sexual advances, which of course are irresistible, she’s hiding her true sexual desire under a facade of disinterest. Thicke is singing about forcing a woman to perform both the good girl and bad girl roles in order to satisfy the man’s desires.

Thicke and company, as all-knowing patriarchs, will give her what he knows she wants (sex), even though she’s not actively consenting, and she may well be rejecting the man outright.

Do it like it hurt, do it like it hurt, what you don’t like work?

This lyric suggests that women are supposed to enjoy pain during sex or that pain is part of sex:

The woman’s desires play no part in this scenario – except insofar as he projects whatever he pleases onto her — another parallel to the act of rape: sexual assault is generally not about sex, but rather about a physical and emotional demonstration of power.

The way you grab me.
Must wanna get nasty.

This is victim-blaming.  Everybody knows that if a woman dances with a man it means she wants to sleep with him, right? And if she wears a short skirt or tight dress she’s asking for it, right? And if she even smiles at him it means she wants it, right?  Wrong.  A dance, an outfit, a smile — sexy or not — does not indicate consent.  This idea, though, is pervasive and believed by rapists.

And women, according to Blurred Lines, want to be treated badly.

Nothing like your last guy, he too square for you.
He don’t smack your ass and pull your hair like that.

In this misogynistic fantasy, a woman doesn’t want a “square” who’ll treat her like a human being and with respect. She would rather be degraded and abused for a man’s gratification and amusement, like the women who dance around half naked humping dead animals in the music video.

The pièce de résistance of the non-censored version of Blurred Lines is this lyric:

I’ll give you something to tear your ass in two.

What better way to show a woman who’s in charge than violent, non-consensual sodomy?

Ultimately, Robin Thicke’s rape anthem is about male desire and male dominance over a woman’s personal sexual agency. The rigid definition of masculinity makes the man unable to accept the idea that sometimes his advances are not welcome. Thus, instead of treating a woman like a human being and respecting her subjectivity, she’s relegated to the role of living sex doll whose existence is naught but for the pleasure of a man.

In Melinda Hugh’s Lame Lines parody of Thicke’s song she sings, “You think I want it/ I really don’t want it/ Please get off it.”  The Law Revue Girls “Defined Lines” response to Blurred Lines notes, “Yeah we don’t want it/ It’s chauvinistic/ You’re such a bigot.”  Rosalind Peters says in her one-woman retort, “Let’s clear up something mate/ I’m here to have fun/ I’m not here to get raped.”

There are no “blurred lines.” There is only one line: consent.

And the absence of consent is a crime.

Sezin Koehler is an informal ethnographer and novelist living in Florida. You can find her on Twitter and Facebook.  

(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

Hi Bagels,

Ever since moving to SF, I hear this phrase a lot – “Nerds are the new cool”. Thanks to the newly minted young gazillionaires like Mark Zuckerberg and Larry & Sergey, the term “nerd” really has taken on a whole new meaning. And yes, many of my girlfriends go on and on about how they find guys with thick glasses and messy hair so cute & adorable.

But is it true? I mean, sure there’s a certain appeal to the super stars like Mark but does the allure of Nerdom descend down to the rest of us common folk?

Are nerds really the new cool?

Thanks to the diversified professions represented among Coffee Meets Bagel members and our team of brilliant staticians we decided to take a crack at finding this out.  Welcome to Dating Myth #2: Are nerds really the new cool? (Dating myth #1 as you know was: Do Jewish Men Really Have A Thing for Asian Women?)

As usual, a quick refresher on how CMB works:  Every day at noon, CMB introduces members to one single (AKA a “Bagel”), whom they must LIKE or PASS within 24 hours. These Bagels are friends of friends who also meet the member’s basic match criteria – gender, age, race, religion – along with some other personal data like their job, interests, personality etc. A mutual LIKE leads to a direct connection via a private phone line and the rest is up to them.

Definition of Nerd

We took a very narrow, job-based definition of the term and so, for the purposes of this analysis: nerd = engineers & scientists (I clearly am not a nerd). We then compared how much the engineers & scientists are liked by their Bagels vs. 17 other jobs most represented on Coffee Meets Bagel.

Unfortunately, we currently don’t have enough LGBT members to compile an accurate analysis so, rather than present incomplete data we’ve once again limited this study to straight men & women. I apologize ahead of time to our LGBT members. Help us get more LGBT members by inviting your friends!

Moving on, here is what we found for both straight men & women.

Despite the alleged coolness of the 21st Century Nerd, it doesn’t look like they can compete with the old school trifecta of doctor, banker, and lawyer, which swept the top 3 in terms of most attractive jobs among Coffee Meets Bagel men (I guess we ladies are more traditional than we think!). Both scientists and engineers scored below average.

Did female nerds fare better? Not really, according to the chart below. Surprisingly, the top 3 jobs men found most attractive in women were startup (as defined as founders, entrepreneurs, business owners etc.), fashion, and consulting (I’m a startup girl but I swear I am not making this up!)

As a side note, I noticed that the one common factor among the top 3 most attractive jobs in men – doctors, bankers, and lawyers – is that they all bring in a lot of $$ vs. the top 3 most attractive jobs among women – startup, fashion, consultant – don’t (generally speaking).

I went ahead and researched the median salary of each occupation with the help of glassdoor.com and ranked each of the occupations in terms of attractiveness (% LIKED) & their median salary.

Then I mapped this out on a graph.

Check out the correlation between the median salary of each job & the % that these men were LIKED. What’s more amazing: the 3 exceptions to the rule.

Really??! The only 3 jobs that ranked higher than avg. in terms of median salary but scored below avg. in % LIKED were HR, Engineer, Scientist. Yes, the nerds…and HR (sorry guys). Is this sheer coincidence or what?

Here is what the same info looked like for the ladies.  As you can see, there’s a slight correlation but it’s much more diversified.

It’s always amazing to me to see the stereotypes you hear about gender roles and expectations in society come alive in the numbers.

 

Conclusion

Based on our career-centric definition it looks like nerds are still, well, nerds. Doctors, lawyers and bankers rule the day and traditional gender roles and expectations still persist, in the dating world at least.

I am guessing that when my girlfriends say they find nerdy guys cute & adorable, they were probably thinking of nerds like Matt Farrell in Die Hard or maybe Alexis Ohanian of Reddit. They still want to date a doctor, they just want him to wear nerdy glasses. Sorry Poindexters and Poindextras, it looks like you lose this round.

 

Progress? Hey, it’s a start.

Dating myth #2: Are nerds really the new cool?

Final verdict: False. Quite the opposite actually.

Stay tuned for our next post! Have any dating myths you want us to bust? Let us know at contact@coffeemeetsbagel.com!

If you have any questions, please feel free to email our Chief Data Scientist Abe here

 

The post Attention all nerds: Are nerds really the new cool when it comes to dating? Here is what we found. appeared first on Coffee Meets Bagel.

Piled Higher & Deeper by Jorge Cham		www.phdcomics.com
title: "Best Ideas" - originally published 8/7/2013 For the latest news in PHD Comics, CLICK HERE!

by Emma Carmichael

ESPN's very good Nine for IX series continues tonight with Let Them Wear Towels, a documentary about the first female reporters to work in men's locker rooms in the '70s and '80s. Robin Herman was one of two women to break the sex barrier in the locker room in 1975, as a 23-year-old reporter covering the 1975 NHL All-Star game in Montreal for the New York Times. Here's Herman talking about her experience in the Times back in 2010:

Herman and another woman — a Montreal radio reporter, Marcel St. Cyr — gathered with other reporters after the game and walked in to conduct postgame interviews. Except she and St. Cyr instantly became the news, and television cameras swung to them. They were believed to be the first women admitted to the locker room of a North American professional sports team.

“I kept saying, ‘I’m not the story; the game is the story,’ ” Herman said, reflecting on the night. “But of course that wasn’t the case. The game was boring. A girl in the locker room was a story.”

There are countless anecdotes Let Them Wear Towels could pull from, both old and new, in which the women attempting to do their work weren't merely treated as spectacles, but also as targets. Recall reporter Paola Boivin, who had a jockstrap slung at her in the St. Louis Cardinals locker room in 1985, or Joan Ryan of the Orlando Sentinel, who had a razor handle run up her leg in a USFL locker room that same year, or Lisa Olson, who was sexually abused in the New England Patriots locker room in 1990 and harassed so vigorously for speaking out against her treatment that she eventually moved to Australia.

In one promotional clip, Herman reads from her own first batch of hate mail [sic'd, and transcribed from the clip]:

Dear Miss Herman,

It's hard to address a harlot disguised as a reporter, but I just want to warn you that you cannot do such a thing with impunity. It's wrong, no matter how many women libers might dumbly applaud it (by the way).

If there had been any real, real men in the locker room, you would have been kicked out on your prostitutional ass. May this happen if there is anything to wake you up to your horrendously bad example. Surely you shall regret this and regret it bitterly.

“It was at the height of the women’s movement,” Herman said in 2010. “It was important to be bold."

Let Them Wear Towels airs on ESPN tonight at 8 p.m. ET.

5 Comments

Robb S. sent along a great set of images from Vulture.  Using case studies of individual leading men in Hollywood, they show that the love interests cast in their films don’t age alongside them over the course of their careers.  Not convinced?  Here’s nine examples and one exception.  For fun, try to guess which leading man bucks the trend?  I’ll embed it last.

And the exception is!

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

One big reason more moms (and dads) don't "lean in" at the office is that they just don't want more work. 

As Catherine Rampell at the New York Times has been reminding us for the past week, that's true for the majority of workers. According to the Families and Work Institute, just 37 percent of working women and 44 percent of working men said they wanted more responsibility at the office in 2008, the last year of data (see below). 

Those figures got me wondering, though: When, exactly, do women and men stop trying to climb the corporate ladder? And why? Is it just about having children or is it something else?

To find out, I asked the Institute to break down its 2008 findings by age group, which produced the graph below. It tells a simple story: By our mid-to-late-20s, the desire to take on more responsibility fades fast for both men and women. 

In other words, ambition starts sliding right around the time most Americans start having kids. (The median woman has her first child at around age 26). And though women slide a bit further than men, both sexes become less interested in a promotion as they age.* That's right in keeping with what Pew has found about the converging roles of mothers and fathers. At some point in our 30s, most of us lean back.

____________________

*To try and figure out whether this was directly related to motherhood, I took at look at the Institute's numbers comparing mothers under 44 with non-mothers. Unfortunately, the differences they showed weren't statistically significant, thanks to the sample sizes.

Kim O'Grady writes, "I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume and landed a job".

The tl;dr version is: Kim was an experienced engineering/business person who was applying for jobs. Sent out dozens of resumes to top places, did not get a single interview. Sent out his resume to a bunch of lower tier places, still no interview. Finally, he realizes they are taking "Kim" to mean he is a woman. So he adds the prefix "Mr." to his resume, sends it out again, and immediately lands interviews.

My first name is Kim. Technically, it’s gender neutral, but my experience showed that most people’s default setting in the absence of any other clues is to assume Kim is a woman’s name. And nothing else on my CV identified me as male. At first I thought I was being a little paranoid, but engineering, sales and management were all male-dominated industries. So I pictured all the managers I had over the years and, forming an amalgam of them in my mind, I read through the document as I imagined they would have. It was like being hit on the head with a big sheet of unbreakable glass ceiling.

This is so sad. It reminds me of neurobiologist Ben Barres' experience, where after giving a seminar as a Ben after his transition from Barbara someone in the audience remarked, "Ben Barres's work is much better than his sister's."

The one I hear a lot in my field is, "X is a superstar" or "X is gifted", and always "X" is a man. I've never heard a woman referred to as a superstar or being gifted in her field. I've also never heard of a young woman referred to as a child prodigy.

Not bike related but pretty fuckin rad just the same

 #SFW

New Weekly Weinersmith. Possibly slightly nsfw.

As part of an ongoing series about inequality in the U.S., tonight PBS will air a segment on the psychology of wealth: that is, how the experience of being (or feeling) well-off impacts our attitudes and behaviors.

As this video clip explains, having wealth appears to affect us in a number of ways. Having more tends to make individuals feel entitled to even more; research shows they feel less generous and more entitled to take resources (such as candy they have been told is for children coming in later), more willing to cheat, and more accepting of unethical behavior. Privileged individuals — even those whose privilege is just having Monopoly rules rigged to ensure they win in an experiment — tend to believe they deserve their privilege.

These patterns show up regardless of political orientation, affecting both liberals and conservatives. Whatever good intentions we might have, the experience of being wealthy appears to affect us in ways it may be hard for individuals to notice, making privileged people feel they deserve their position and justifying behaviors that consolidate even more advantages.

You can read more here. Also check out our earlier posts presenting PBS clips on Americans’ misperceptions of the level of inequality in the U.S. and the health impacts of inequality.

Gwen Sharp is an associate professor of sociology at Nevada State College. You can follow her on Twitter at @gwensharpnv.

(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

1. Obsessive interest in words. 2. Excessive and often incoherent talking.

As far back as 2008, Israel’s Health Ministry and Prison Service formulated clear criteria for the shackling of hospitalized prisoners. But as it turns out, the Prison Service still dictates the policy and doctors’ hands are tied — and shackling procedures are still being applied arbitrarily.

Related:
As Palestinian hunger strikes come to a head, world begins to take notice

A staff person for Washington state Senator Mike Hewitt (R-Walla Walla) recently told a Washington blogger that LGBT individuals can fend for themselves when they are denied services under a recently proposed bill.

Jay Castro, a reader of the Washington blog column Slog at The Stranger, called Senator Hewitt’s office to ask about his sponsorship of SB 5927, which would allow people to refuse to provide services and discriminate against LGBT people because of “sincerely held religious beliefs.” Castro asked an unidentified staffer, “What are rural gays supposed to do if the only gas station or grocery store for miles won’t sell them gas and food?” Hewitt’s staffer responded to Castro, “Well, gay people can just grow their own food” (emphasis added).

When Slog blogger Anna Minard attempted to call the office for clarification, she was hung up on three times by staffers before being told “It was a poor response to a question, that’s really all I want to say about that. [Castro] caught me at a bad time; I’m not interested in answering hypotheticals. It was a combative call. Patience was lost, mistakes were made, and that’s it.” The spokesperson said that the staffer’s comment was not representative of Hewitt’s views on the proposal.

Media Resources: Huffington Post 4/29/2013; ThinkProgress 4/29/2013; Slog 4/26/2013

Harvesting carrots in kitchen garden from Shutterstock