text:
"The Wrath of The Feminists": A Discussion of Masculinity, Gender, and Feminism
A Twitter discussion @jennpozner, @TMatlack, @hugoschwyzer @amandamarcotte @shiratarrant, @feministfather, @therealroseanne and others.
I dont disagree with you..
I dare say that in this conversation on gender issues is very disingenuous deceptive intentionally misleading and obnoxious in pretense as it is a discussion on gender issues which most of us who are not of the most deluded post-modernist schools of deconstructionism recognize as by nature requiring the elements of essentialism in the form of defining the male-female genders without which I ask:
What is the meaning of a" feminism" and "gender issues" that one speaks of without a definition of gender etc. so as to continue the ephemeral elitist debate of American "feminism" here which failed to pass the Equal Right Amendment, nor properly addressed nor acquires any of the basic rights which those bad bad Europeans accomplished years ago merely because they specifically avoided such pretentious debates as these, to secure in their positive self-images of being while reactionary America squandered opportunities merely to satisfy its inferior political basis of upper middle class nonsense (completely alienated from the mainstream of society so that we can look back to Nixon and his support of Affirmative action, Legal Services as the "Golden Age" of what I call barbarism).
An America so backward and reactionary almost any European is more progressive and advanced.
"Imagining the POV of someone you're in conflict with is bare minimum of being a good person, yes." -Amanda Marcotte
"I've been sort of casually listening to CNN blaring throughout the waiting area and good fucking god is that channel pure evil. For awhile, I had to listen to how the poor dear lacrosse players at Duke are being persecuted just because they held someone down and fucked her against her will—not rape, of course, because the charges have been thrown out. Can't a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair." -Amanda Marcotte
….with all of this talking wouldn't the wise thing to do be to do whats healthy for yourself and those around you? stickinging to a holistic course and making an enviornment around you that promotes the same… would that not be the sollution. then all of us would need only to worry about defining what is healthy.
Ugly women are hilariously sexist.
When presented with logic, a woman can go emotional.
The man has to flee.
Welcome to the man-club Hugo, you just are not aware of it yet!
(They will rip you apart at the rad-fems sites, just because you carry external genitalia)
No amount of supplication will ever be enough for the would-be gyno masters.
The only good man is a **** man?
Very few of you are using logic in this debate. It's a perfect reflection of the "us vs. them" mentality prevalent throughout most feminist and men's rights sites.
The wage gap statistic was calculated by comparing the wages of all working men to all working women, regardless of how many hours they worked, or what fields they worked in. When adjusted for those factors, women at all levels earn about 96 cents on the dollar. Some calculations have found women's wages to be 98 cents on the dollar. Thus, "75 cents on the dollar" is both invalid and useless.
However, even those calculations don't tell the whole story. Other studies have demonstrated that in any particular field, a woman needs a bachelor's degree to earn as much as a man with a high-school diploma. Other studies, conducted in large metros like New York and D.C. have shown women under 30 to earn $1.02 for every dollar a man earns. Other studies have shown that female CEOs are compensated more highly than male CEOs, even though female CEOs are rarer. Still other studies have shown wage gaps as high as 80 cents on the dollar when male and female managers with identical credentials, experience, and years in the workforce are compared. Is any one statistic more valid than the other? That depends on what you want to say with your statistics.
However, anecdotal evidence is not "useless," as some claim. One anecdote may be. But many anecdotes taken together may provide a clearer picture, as long as the anecdotal evidence is collected in a fair way, and isn't cherry picked. I'm a woman who works in high tech. On the whole, I outearn most men my age by up to 25K, and I even outearn many men who are a decade or more my senior. Within my own profession, too, I outearn many men because I'm a manager and they are not. However, when compared with male managers in my profession, I sometimes earn less. At times, this has been because I'm a younger manager, and therefore less experienced. At other times, my gender was clearly the problem – like at the company I started at, where a man with equivalent skills, but less experience and only a high school diploma, made $4/hour more than I did. And at the company I resigned after a long tenure, where only female employees, just as senior and qualified as the male employees, had to "pay their dues" as contractors responsible for their own taxes and healthcare, while the men were hired outright, and where the men all got new, modern computers and software, while the women were assigned secondhand computers with outdated or "student" copies of older software. (Yes, I worked longer days than 65% of the men, and equally long days as the other 35%.)
I also worked at a position where every male tech director was ultimately fired by the female executive he reported to. The revolving door that was this position did not end until the director slot was filled by a woman. At that time, the female executive "cleaned house," replacing male employees with female employees. Isolated, my experiences are nothing more than tales of individual sexist bosses (male or female), but if we collected anecdotes and found a pattern developing among them, we can begin to speculate about correlation and causation.
The reality of the gender wage gap is simple: there is no concrete answer. You can make statistics and anecdotes say anything you want. It's more useful to look at patterns of bias in either direction within specific professions, and especially, at specific companies. We have the power to take action against biased companies today, by writing negative reviews about our experiences with them on Glassdoor.com, and spreading the word as we network. The free market, not the government, is the best arbiter of fairness in many cases – as the biased companies will develop a negative reputation, and their egalitarian competitors will enjoy recruiting talent away from them.
Someone being rational suggesting that women are neither perfect nor hopelessly flawed.
"The reality of the gender wage gap is simple: there is no concrete answer. You can make statistics and anecdotes say anything you want. It's more useful to look at patterns of bias in either direction within specific professions, and especially, at specific companies."
Thank you for being constructive.
Sure enough I was right.
The rad-fems did turn on Hugo, within 48 hours of my writing that post.
It saddens me so very greatly when the feminists are saddened,but my sadness is so much deeper than their sadness.
I read on Hugo's blog that he has quit GMP.
Due what i saw as the nature of the man that was revealed in the recollections of his past, and also in the most recent Feministe post involving hugo, I am extremely sceptical of his version of events.
If the breech is too great between you all to be repaired.
Will you be replacing Hugo with a feminist who holds similar views – i hope so.
A diversity of article writers is good, and my eyes opened in ever wider amazement reading most of his articles eg. Who could forget his 'accidental rape' article that a one once-regular commenter accurately forecast would appear.
As I read through this conversation, all I could think was "Wow, what a sniveling bunch of emotional cripples!"
One of the problems I noticed while reading this was that there is such a clear distinction between "us" and "them," regardless from whom it came. There were so many mentions of women vs. men, men vs. MRA, feminists vs. men, feminists vs. MRA…the list goes on. I urge all of you to consider your speech and how you view these discussions. As Jenn Pozner mentioned, it shouldn't be this hard for allies to have open dialogues, but it will only continue to be this difficult if everyone sees the conversations as coming from separate sides. In addition, don't contrast "feminists" with "men," because many men are feminists as well. These seem to be basic pointers, but I believe they're easily forgotten. (If you believe I've made a glaring mistake in this, I'd like to hear it and continue my education of intersectionality.)
"you mean closet case whiners, right?
TheRealRoseanne5 days ago"
It doesn't suprise me that this woman made such an offensively ridiculous comment.
Isn't this the same woman who starred in a scene on her "Roseanne" program that promoted extreme sexual violence against men?
If I recall correctly, the scene she starred in involved her kneeing a fitness instructure/shop owner in the testes for no other reason than he made a comment about her weight. It wasn't out of self-defence, but out of anger.
The question is, would she agree to perform in a scene where she is kneed in the vulva after saying something to a man that he doesn't like?
I have the feeling she would refuse. She'd probably say it's embarrassing to promote vulval pain– for those who don't know, a blow to the vulva can be quite painful, definitely more so than a blow to any other region of the female anatomy — because it's of a seemingly sexual nature and portrays violence against women's external genitalia as acceptable.
Of course the feminists on here don't see anything wrong with promoting violence against men's generative organs for trivial reasons. They believe it's okay for a woman to jeopardise a man's endocrine system and generative organs should he dare to say something that makes them "feel" a bit upset. It doesn't worry them that testicular abuse has been linked to post traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety and depression. They just tell those men to "man up" and "get over it" because that's what men are "supposed to do". But like all feminists, they don't use the same logic when dealing with women who are victims. Instead, they would throw an almighty tantrum if a man were to kick a woman in the vulva for saying something he found offensive, even if the "kick" was choreographed on television and did not make contact with the recipient's vulva!
I have no time for these women. I'll cheer loud and proud if some one gives each one of them a "good kick" in the vulva in real life. I'll cheer twice as loud and proud if the kick is delivered by a "good man".
Afterall, they'd tell a man to just "man up" and "get over it" if he was the recipient of testicular abuse, so why should these women be treated any differently?
They're for equal treatment, no?
Why do the feminists always claim men have been bestowed with privilege throughout history?
Old English Law actually gave women more privileges than it gave men. For example, if a woman spent all of her husband's money then HE would go to debtors' prison. Women who performed crimes while their husbands were present were given total impunity. That means if a woman assaulted another person while her husband was present then the victim's testimony would be ignored.
Don't believe it?
Go read the "Declaration of Sentiments" from the Seneca Falls Women's Convention at Seneca Falls, New York in 1848. This fact was mentioned in it!
Read some of the above debate after the facet. Thank you for tackling this, and allowing such a range of views. It is good to be reminded of the diversity of opinion and experience out there. Will join you next time.
Oh em gee. This. This right here. There is SO MUCH in this dialogue. SO MUCH.
One thing I can't help but point out is that twitter (and blog post comments, for that matter) are not always the best place for this kind of dialogue. People can easily read text how they would like; context and tone are difficult to convey. How do we create a dialogue face-to-face, or in another medium where we don't get bogged down being defensive and taking things the wrong way?
Regardless – there are a lot of underlying narratives (my new fav word, clearly) in this, so many subtle things that are quite literally unseen by those perpetuating them. I think we *need* to engage at THAT level. For one, I'm planning on writing about it with a fellow blogger, yet I'd welcome any additional discussion, mediums for discussion, people to join our conversation, etc. It shouldn't end here.
Most fascinating on the overall. Though I'd say Roseanne and some of the other women in that discussion need to check their heterosexual privilege. That "closet-case whiners" joke was homophobic. Want to talk kyrirachy? Walk the walk and decline to laugh when being gay is treated as an insult. Small moments add up.
Nice Point! Well Made!
Small moments add up. – is very true! Some Build Mountains from the little bits and then claim a higher perspective from what they have built.
I wonder if flat earth thinking shouldn't have a resurgence?
Wow. Shocking. I am so shocked that no feminists wanted to debate the gender wage gap myth.
It's all the more surprising because they all sounded soooo certain they would win that debate too.
But… none here now.
Yep. Gone. Wonder why?
Probably because they are going to their fall back spot of "it doesn't matter how big the gap is the problem is the gap". Not sure how that translates into holding onto the most desparate sounding number possible (remember how for the longest time only 2% of rape allegations were false?).
You mean they actually gave up defending the 2% thing? They admit rape is unique in the high number of false accusations — vastly higher than any other crime?
Hold on slow down DavidByron. I didn't say all that. All I'm saying is that from what I can tell mention of that 2% stat seems to have faded into obscurity. But I'm pretty sure there is still the usual "false rape allegations don't happen anymore than allegations of other crimes" talk.
Based on the comments here– the whole thread about Ms Magazine– I went and read Amanda Marcotte's piece, The Answer to MRAs: More Feminism.
Anyone who reads that and doesn't see the validity of her points really has no interest in becoming a "good man" (or woman) or entering into a discussion about it.
"Anyone who reads that and doesn't see the validity of her points really has no interest in becoming a "good man" (or woman) or entering into a discussion about it."
Anyone who doesn't see the imagined validity that you're associating with Marcotte's insane drivel is a sane person who refuses to be manipulated.
Anyone who reads that and doesn't see the validity of her points really has no interest in becoming a "good man" (or woman) or entering into a discussion about it.
And that's where you lost it. That piece you're talking about was damn near a cheap shot hatchet job of MRAs (and if I'm not mistaken that was one of those pieces where Marcotte opened with a personal insult against MRAs, great way to profess your good faith….).
Yeah she had a good point or two in that piece but brilliant is not the word I'd use.
This thread made me really, really like Roseanne Barr.
Yes. Hopefully she has recovered from getting hit by that log.
I cannot believe you just implied validation for the (violent+misogynist) MRA guys, @TMatlack. Or typed the phrase "wrath of the feminists." jennpozner 2 days ago
I do not know, who is 'jennpozner', but I can say for sure, she has no idea about the Men's Rights Movement.
We are neither violent or misogynist, and many of us are married and have children.
We always advice disappointed men who were badly treated by women in their past not to look back but to move on. We advice them always to refrain from hate and violent actions, to move away quickly to avoid disputes which are going to nowhere and to start a new life with entire new people.
What maybe is so difficult to accept for 'jennpozner' is the advice, we give to young single men. We strongly support prevention, we advice young men to learn how to avoid mistakes in their future.
We advice young single men to study carefully existing laws AND how these laws are executed in court decisions.
We tell them to be careful and to avoid legal situations which might bring them into serious legal and financial trouble over decades.
If 'jennpozner' considers such advice as 'misogynist', so let it be.
DavidByron says:
December 17, 2011 at 8:05 pm
I find it offensive that you claim feminism is about equality.
I find it offensive too.
I see the feminist movement merely as advocacy groups which are looking for privileges and advantages for certain women, not even for all women – feminism has nothing to do with equality.
It seems like two sides disagree on this board, but only one side gets to say the other is being offensive. That's got to change. People are so used to feminists saying incredibly insulting things about men it's as if it has become acceptable just by repetition.
Btw, I'm not a MRA (I'm a lot meaner 😉
I've already had stuff deleted. I probably deserved it — but I see far worse stuff posted by feminists here.
Seriously though my motivation is more equality and justice whereas MRA folks are the guys who really have to care about people at the level where it hurts. I come at this from the angle of studying hate groups and prejudice more than individuals suffering. I don't want anyone blaming MRAs for me being an ass. I'm not an activist. Just someone who can't stand to see hate masquerading as equality.
"Just someone who can't stand to see hate masquerading as equality."
Amen to that!
I too suffer under the burden of not being in one camp or the other. I find it highly amusing how to one group I am an extreme feminist laden with Misandry and the other some form of unreconstructed male laden with Misogyny.
To Paraphrase Capt Jean-Luc Picard – when he was assimilated by The Borg and named Locutus,
"Projection Is Futile.".
I also object to those who seek to exploit others under the guise of concern, friendship and help. When that happens I have a different view – Resistance is not futile – it's "Man"datory.
MediaHound says:
December 17, 2011 at 1:44 pm
…..However, as a nonprofit charitable corporation, I understand that it is not mandatory for the information you seek to be supplied. It is discretionary, and may possible be obtained from the relevant officers by use of a formal and polite letter sent by land mail.
I know that they are not obliged to disclose such information in public, but on the other side, I ask for your understandings, if they refuse, and certain feminist websites cheer their publications with Hugo and Amanda, are mentioning donations of USD 500.000,- and writers calling the MS. magazine to be geneous and the GMP under their wing, MRAs will ask if this is really a website for men or if it is totally controlled by feminists in disguise.
As I said already, the GMP is acting somewhat differently from other feminist publications, as it is in general not into deleting and editing of comments from MRAs, who disagree with the authors or blog-owners.
I dared disagree with Amanda Marcotte in that conversation. Because I did so, she went on to claim that I "police" women, don't allow them to feel anger, cast aspersions on my marriage and then told me I was "gross." Go ahead, look it up. It's right there.
I never personally attacked her, I certainly didn't tell her how to feel & I would never presume to question the nature of her romantic relationships. Yet I was somehow fair game, all because I had a differing opinion. Because apparently with feminists like Marcotte, if you're not with them 100% or if you question even a part of their "logic," you're against them. And it's open season.
Feminism, to me, is about equality. Equal pay, equal rights, equal treatment, etc. In that vein, I am absolutely a feminist. Hell, I feel that way about everyone so technically I believe that would make me a humanist. So feminism = good. Some feminists on the other hand, not so much.
A lot was made of the word "wrath." If you cant' see the wrath readily apparent in that conversation, then you're blind. That, along with the condescending sarcasm, derision and pompousness in which their words are soaked, repels moderates who would ordinarily be allies. So if the goal is to alienate, well done. Mission accomplished.
Normally I'm a big fan of having a discussion take place and trying to take something away from both sides. In this case, not so much. You're with them or against them. Which is unfortunate.
I find it offensive that you claim feminism is about equality.
You say feminism is for equal pay? If you've discussed that issue much you know that feminists actually demand equal pay for women who don't work as hard as the men they are compared with. You know they dishonestly misrepresent the figures.
You say feminism is about equal rights. So explain to me why the feminist movement lobbied congress to pass a sexist bill that discriminated against male victims of domestic violence in the 1990s (Violence Against Women Act). Why did they demand male victims receive no aid?
You tell me one single thing that feminism stands for today that is about equality.
DB: I don't think that's true about equal pay. C'mon. Women currently make 79 cents to a man's dollar. That's unfair any way you cut it.
Now, if you want to talk about how men are treated in domestic violence cases and by the courts during custody battles, that's a different story. But my point is, there are "privileges" on both sides. As a white, heterosexual male I know I enjoy privileges. More than most I'm sure. But there are advantages and disadvantages no matter who you are. And I don't think those should be discounted just because one side has more or less.
79 cents? It would be incredibly unfair if it was actually TRUE. You seriously saying you don't know the truth behind that feminist lie? I don't know. I just sometimes assume that people on these boards know about all this stuff you know? It's been explained so many times. If you really don't know it's a lie then I apologise for jumping on you like that. I don't mind explaining it once again, or I bet anyone here could, or you can Google it. eg "Gender wage gape fraud" would probably do it. Your choice.
Now as for DV did I say anything about family court? We all know men get screwed there but I didn't. You said feminism was for equality and I said they passed a bill that explicitly discriminated against men. Now maybe you never heard of VAWA before. It was big in the 1990s. It was probably the single biggest "success" of the feminist movement in the 90s. All the feminist groups backed it. A billion dollars for helping the victims of domestic violence. and they made sure it said no male victims can be helped. If you help male victims? Not a penny for you.
So you tell me. How does a movement that believes in gender equality lobby hard for discrimination? That would be like the NRA accidentally passing a law that bans handguns.
Come on. You said feminism is for equality. I say it's a hate movement. So we disagree. But it's not exactly hard to tell the difference is it? Those two things aren't exactly close are they? It's pretty easy to come up with stuff that an equality movement would never do, but a hate movement would. Examine the evidence.
Like with that gender wage gap thing? What if I'm right and it's a big lie? What kind of movement would pass of a huge lie like that about men? What kind of a movement would deliberately try to cause women to resent men like that? An equality movement? Or something else?
Now feminists are always going on about "male privilege" but can never say what it is. You may have privileges (I don't know, maybe you're rich) but I mean privileges all men have just because they are male. I keep asking but no feminist can ever tell me what those privileges are. Funny huh? I mean their entire reason to exist is to complain about stuff men have that women don't, right? But when someone actually asks them for a single example? Nothing.
And I've been asking for over twenty years.
Now what do you think? Does that sound like an equality movement or a hate movement?
Re: women's wages compared to men's: "79 cents? It would be incredibly unfair if it was actually TRUE."
Er. It's definitely true, if not underestimated. Yes, i do have personal experience with this.
Jill I'm sorry to have to do this, but I'm going to have to use my male privilege here to use mark up. What women earn on average is a statistic. You cannot have personal experience of a statistic. Personal experience is an anecdote.
I know you ladies can't do that italics stuff. Sorry about that. Perk of being a man.
But seriously the 79 cents on the dollar stuff has been represented as for when men and women are doing the same work. That's false. You know? As in "equal pay for equal work"? If all you mean is that when a woman doesn't do as much work as a man then she might get paid less, then I agree. Sure, women get paid less if they do less work. Is that what you meant?
This has been debunked. You can calculate it in various ways but the wage gap remains in most groups when comparing apples to apples. You sound like an MRA (although you are actually right about personal experience being anecdata).
How revealing – if you correct error and point out that there are fundamental differences between anecdote and for want of a better word facts – it makes you look MRA!
And some wonder why Tom got attacked when he provided anecdotes of his own expediences and some decided to attack them as factually incorrect.
I personally have never subscribed to ideas of genders and planets – but I can see why some do – and I can also see why warfare metaphors and even use of the term Wrath have their place in discussion.
That's misleading, because there are so many variables that go into determining how much someone is paid that you can never be sure you're making an apples-to-apples comparison. We're talking about human beings, after all.
Feminists celebrate "equal pay day" supposedly as a representation of how much less money women get for the same work as men. It even has a web site and an organisation all of its own.
Do you happen to know how that date is calculated? It is not calculated in "various ways" but in one way. Do you know how? Are you willing to stand behind that calculation? Or will you concede that it is a lie?
You would do well to read this link posted in the above conversation. http://derailingfordummies.com/#opinion
I have personal experience too. I'm a tax consultant. I have access to complete income detail for tens of thousands of clients. Feminist claims are bunkum.
Analysis of federal government data in Australia for 2008-2009 shows the HOURLY rate of pay for women to be 98.7% of that of men. Women average about 34 hours/week while men average more than 44. Total incomes for women working full time are about 88% of those for full time men.
DavidByron is right — that statistic is completely bogus. (Not to mention completely outdated – women have earned around 80 to 81 percent of men's earnings for years).
It's worth learning how that statistic is actually calculated. It's just the median wage of all female full-time workers, compared to that of male workers. But men work longer hours (as calculated on time-use surveys); earn a much greater share of "professional" degrees (e.g, MD, JD — the ones that really increase your earnings); work in more dangerous professions, as measured by workplace deaths; work in higher-paying professions, like engineering; are much less likely to leave the labor force for a few years; are more likely to work overnight shifts; etc. etc.
Ahh, I wrote a research paper on this a few years ago…as hotly debated several years later, I see.
This is actually correct, mostly. There are a number of attributable factors as mentioned (danger pay, more mat leave taken than pat leave, more women work part time hours than men, etc.)
It also doesn't take regional and/or industrial factors into consideration to show how well women are doing in some areas (which is a travesty, frankly). Example: in my area of work, women now outnumber men in the executive cadre. However, a wage gap still exists as there are more traditionally 'pink collar' positions still held by a majority of women than there are executive positions. SO if you look at the thousands of employees, the dollar figure by gender, women make more. But if you look at percentage earnings over all position categories, the middle management men (there are always more middle management positions than executives, and they earn more than support staff), it appears there is indeed a wage gap. This is biased reporting.
That said, once the adjustments are made to incorporate these differences, there is still an unattributable gap (in terms of cents on the dollar however, it is, or was several years ago, single digit cents). Yes, we should be striving towards eaqual pay for equal work…when these are precisely the circumstances…and yes striving because while close, it's not there yet.
An "unattributable gap?" Only when you're using extraordinarily crude means to measure wages. There are like thousands of different factors that go into how much some earns. How good a negotiator they are. The size of their firm and how prestigious or profitable it is. How persistent they are in asking for raises. How good they are at sucking up to the boss for promotions. How often they have left the labor pool. Etc. etc. etc.
Basically, I'd say any kind of macro wage survey is useless for trying to prove discrimination. It's like trying to take a survey of earth from in orbit. It can't really be done.
once the adjustments are made to incorporate these differences, there is still an unattributable gap (in terms of cents on the dollar however, it is, or was several years ago, single digit cents)
So you agree that the feminists are lying when they go on about 75 cents on the dollar and so on?
This is their "official" site for the lie and it says 77 cents. You agree that is a lie?
DB: I would NEVER, ever call someone a liar, nor am I saying their stat is incorrect specifically. All I am saying is that, depending on the methods of research and mathematics used, the factors involved, the market measured, people get different answers. I also gave my research as an example. Of note, it is NOT the same market as the site quoted above. However, it is comparable and affected by the same external factors, and there are some sites and stats that have wrongly measured THIS gap NOT accounting for the aforementioned factors, so its not an equal pay for equal work situation.
Not all data is collected and/or measured accurately…that's all I'm saying.
ANd thanks for the link, but how on God's Green Earth is this as official site? It's run by an interest group…and there is nothing denoting their credentials in the realm of statistical analysis (even the partner sites listed, few with credentials have those that are related), nor their method of data collection. I'm not sure I'd trust this as being official.
Yes Derek, it's not MICRO, and such surveying cannot be (but neither can job turnover, illness rates, etc be accurately measured). But to dismiss it without the MICRO-level proof that is does not exist is also inaccurate. Among the millions of private employers in North America (of varying firm sizes), there's no way to prove that those mere (singular) pennies are truly being equally distributed.
You know, you're preaching to the choir, right??
So you know they are putting out false facts that help negatively stereotype men (the 77 cents thing) but you refuse to call them out as liars? To my mind that makes you complicit.
These people have been lying for forty years. Millions of feminists repeat this lie every day. Millions of innocent people unknowingly repeat it daily. This is the biggest lie, the most prejudicial lie told today I think. You actually looked into the issue so you know for a fact what they are saying is false and you refuse to call them out.
Can you explain why I shouldn't draw the obvious conclusion about you?
"so its not an equal pay for equal work situation"
DaddyFiles, Jill, meerkat and millions of other people think it is an equal pay for equal work situation because millions of feminists tell them that every day. You know that is false. But instead of pointing out the lie you refuse to do so. Why?
You don't even say that the statement is false. But let's face it the idea that the entire feminist community has repeated this factoid for four decades and not KNOWN they were repeating false information is ridiculous. Of course they know. People like me have been telling them for four decades. Of course they know.
Btw I have 2 degrees in mathematics (specifically statistics) so I know all about the details you think are important. I'm not responding to that stuff because it is not relevant to the question at hand which is that it is false to claim that these 77 cents figures — created from simply averaging wages across all jobs — are "equal pay for equal work" figures. You know that is false. I know it is false. But millions repeat that lie every day, many unknowingly.
David, let's not get on the personal…that does nobody any good. Look at what happened to poor Tom the other day.
I said I wouldn't call someone a liar…and I still don't think it fair to place a label on someone who is doling out false information, because I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt…it could be a misguided belief.
What we are getting away from is that I have no findings on the figures quoted on the site you gave. My stats, although under similar conditions, don't speak to the American market specifically. There are a litany of issues with that, and I don't feel right making an outright statement because of that. Like I said, the conditions/situations are too similar to ignore, and I do believe you are right that this is the situation in the U.S. as well.
When that lie is perpetuated on the ground level (in my community and peer groups), I do indeed speak my piece, relate my findings. It changes alot more minds on a one-to-one basis.
That's not good enough. This is a terribly destructive and prejudicial lie that has been passed around for decades. You're in a position to counter it. When you don't then people will take your silence as agreement.
And even if you really think it is possible for a movement to just "accidentally" issue false information for forty years, then you could still loudly point out that the information is false. This is a moral duty.
I really don't get how much clearer I have to be on that.
Well, I agree that a wage survey can't prove or disprove discrimination. And I'm sure that with what, 60 million or so women in the workplace, there are some that have been discriminated against. But I don't think that severe discrimination (as opposed to crude office comments) are exactly an everyday occurrence, either. Especially as you get up the food chain, women workers are pretty prized and fought after. Well, nearly all good skilled employees are, really.
If you had to hazard a guess, what percentage of women do you think have been denied a job or promotion just because of their gender??
Where I work? Not many!!! Because the hiring processes are so stringent, it is near impossible to discriminate based on gender.
Yeah. In my industry, good workers (both male and female) are lured away by competitors with promises of promotions and higher salaries. Not based on their gender but based on their abilities. I've never heard a friend or coworker complain or voice suspicions about being denied a job or promotion.
FAO Julie
Railroad Tactics and how not to get Railroaded.
Sorry had to go digging in me archives! The dust was terrible.
Fighting Fit – Jason Jarrett won't just compromise any more
Bombarded with headlines about conflict, we have an automatic tendency to associate it with negativity, violence and war. This association, made by large sections of the media as well as leading figures in society, can easily lead us to confuse conflict with violence. Conflict and violence are not the same thing. When asked about conflict prevention during a seminar at Taplow Court, Professor of Peace Studies Johan Galtung said:
'Some of you used the word conflict prevention. It is not a very fortunate term. What you mean is violence prevention. So when I am listening, be kind enough not to say conflict prevention because I am going to try and convince you that conflict is marvellous. It is the salt of the earth but written on it are the words, 'Handle with Care'
(Course on Conflict Transformation, 1997).
Conflict exists when various parties with a common interest have goals which appear to be contradictory. The more important the goals are, the more the parties may feel frustration. If the conflict is not resolved, it may fester as aggression and later erupt in violence. If the conflict is taken seriously, and is worked through in a creative way, then it represents an opportunity for a better future that satisfies everyone's goals.
Co-operative solutions
This kind of thinking is at the heart of Galtung's 'transcend' method of conflict transformation, which holds that all the parties are responsible for the conflict that has emerged. This premise is similar to the Buddhist concept of dependent origination, according to which everything is integrally related. Buddhism teaches that all phenomena exist or occur only because of their relationship with other phenomena. Nothing can exist in absolute independence of other things, or arise of its own accord.
To see how this is related to issues of conflict, imagine a sinking boat with a full complement of crew. If individuals amongst the crew spend their time blaming each other, instead of bailing out the boat and repairing the damage. they will sink. The parties involved (the individual members of the crew) need to act collectively to prevent the conflict (the sinking boat). Attaching blame and denying responsibility only make the situation worse. Similarly, if the world is consumed in violence, arguing about whose fault it is will not help us to survive. Like the crew in the boat, we can all contribute to create a future where everyone's goals can be satisfied.
No compromise
This approach is markedly different from compromise. Compromise means that everyone has to give up something in order to find a middle ground that everyone can agree to. Given that the goals were important enough to form a conflict in the first place, what chance is there of a sustainable agreement resulting from compromise?
Here's the word from this corner, "Ditch the word compromise from your vocabulary". It is a justification used when people cannot come up with a creative solution. Some might take issue with this, saying some conflicts are more complex than others. I say. "Question the received wisdom!" Compromise is not a solution. It is a stop-gap measure that will not produce lasting results.
Often, complex situations become deadlocked because those involved are not soliciting the creativity of all the parties affected. Human beings tend to simplify complex situations into separate bite-sized chunks that the brain can easily understand. This tendency is reinforced by sound-bite media which reports conflict as if it were sport, one side against another. The truth is that nearly every conflict involves more than two parties.
In mapping out the 1992 Gulf War, Professor Galtung identified forty-four parties and thirty-two goals. Most of us might remember it as a war between the UN and Iraq, with Kuwait involved somehow! Galtung explains that the more complex the problem, the more potential there is for a creative solution. It is, he says, the very complexity of a conflict that provides the fertile ground from which new ideas and creativity can spring forth.
Railroad tactics?
Professor Galtung used the following example as an illustration. He and his wife have a house in Oslo. It is on an estate of about 200 houses. The people in the southern part of the estate live closer to the railway. Consequently, they are affected by more noise. They wanted compensation, namely, that there be no car parking outside their accommodation. That was fine in 1977, when the estate was built.
As people's standard of living improved, families began to have two cars. These were gradually parked further and further towards the south of the estate, so the southerners stood up in revolt. The conflict became quite nasty. People discussed building a parking area in the north of the estate, although the site they had in mind was already used by the kindergarten. The matter was complicated further when a letter arrived from the Norwegian railway. They needed a major part of the southern territory to build a third track.
Then somebody came up with an idea, 'OK, we accept a third track, we build a roof over all 3 tracks and on it, we will build a parking place'. The Norwegian railway said OK. So suddenly, although there were several parties and the problem looked messy, it was exactly because of that that there was a solution. Everybody was satisfied. One person with imagination can transform a conflict into an opportunity that can benefit everyone.
Creative Vision
Conflict, then, is an opportunity to create a new and better future. In practical terms, how can we use conflict to bring about the positive change in society that meets everyone's needs? For this to happen, and to prevent violence from developing, everyone involved must be treated with respect. At the heart of the 'transcend' method of conflict transformation is the idea that all parties should be inspired to strive for higher goals. These higher goals, or visions, should transcend the differences that emerge from small conflicting issues. In talking about vision, first SGI-UK General Director Dick Causton once said 'Big dreams carry many small dreams within them , small dreams carry only themselves.'
Similarly, conflict should be directed towards creating visions of peace, where everyone benefits. If this overarching vision is established as a firm goal, then it becomes simpler to work backwards, to know what action to take. To use a Galtung phrase ' Create peace by peaceful means.' The enormous energy that is generated by conflict can be used for the betterment of humanity as a whole, rather than for the benefit of a few. The energy of conflict is the stuff of life itself. Where there is life, there will always be conflict of some kind. We can use it to create either suffering or joy – the choice is always ours.
When faced with a conflict situation there are a number of ways in which we can react. . The most common strategies are: withdrawal, suppression, win/ lose, compromise and win/ win. If we examine these we will be able to see that we may habitually use one of these strategies to deal with a conflict. There are certain times when each of these could be appropriate, but most people tend to rely on only one strategy whatever the situation is. This is limiting because it restricts our ability to achieve successful and satisfying results. Win/win strategies are often not entered into because we are so used to our old habits and because it requires creative work.
Withdrawal: This can defuse the immediate conflict, but can also allow the problem to escalate. It can also lead to people who withdraw, punishing themselves.
Suppression: This can preserve the relationship, but can be a refusal to acknowledge that there is a problem, and does not reach a solution.
Win/Lose: This is an unconscious compulsion to protect oneself – it can be necessary, but seldom provides a long-term answer.
Compromise: This is a product of skilful negotiation but sometimes all the options are not explored and there can be a lack of commitment.
Win/Win: This is an attempt to find better and more creative solutions.
There are 4 stages which are employed in a win/win strategy.
Find out why each party needs what they want.
Find out where the differences dovetail.
Find out what the options are.
Co-operation – the parties work as partners not opponents The attitude is that everyone can be used to resolve conflicts.
So, if we can start from the viewpoint that each person wants something and that there may be a way in which everyone can achieve something, we can avoid the traditional means of resolving conflicts – that is, one side as a victor and the other as a victim. It may not always be obvious how a solution with which everyone is satisfied can be achieved, but it is often surprising how often a discussion carried out with this seeking mind can yield a resolution by which all parties do feel that they have won a victory.
Can we stop giving these feminist clowns such a privileged position here?
Feminists don't define what men are. Their articles and misinformation is usually well discredited whenever they post here.
Stop position them as some sort of authority on men, they are not. Let them continue to contribute, but stop treating them like they are any authority.
Try to patch up the bridges with the mens movement, they are far better informed than these feminist charlatans with their convoluted research, abuse denial and Mary Dalys' rape culture ideology.
And how come the feminists can be as abusive as they like with people constantly complaining about their abuse and they get their stuff highlighted but men's rights people get kicked off the site?
"Probably not since black men DON'T commit more crimes on average. They are arrested and prosecuted at higher rates."
1. Most crime is intraracial, not interracial.
2. Blacks are less likely to report crime due to a bad relationship with police and crime against black is less likely to be investigated due to racism
3. Black victimization rates to due to crime are higher than white victimization rates
Simplest explanation to explain higher black victimization rates is that blacks are committing more crimes against their own people. Even if blacks are arrested and prosecuted at higher rates it does not explain the higher black victimization rate.
You just can't have a decent debate with these people. They've already made up their minds and won't budge at all from their views, treating every little voice of dissent (such as yours) with contempt.
Looking at what they've said and how they treated Tom during the debate, their voices reminded me so much of the very feminists, the very strain of feminism, that told me my pain didn't matter because I benefited from instituionalised sexism as a pure, white, priveledged male. That my struggles were piffle compare to what women go through. It's like I said, the fact that I was bullied and hurt by girls and women meant absoloutly NOTHING to people like the ones in the Twitter feed highlighted.
I'm sorry but again, people like the ones in this article, are the reason why I don't call myself a feminist. Because I'd be sharing the same space as them considering feminism isn't a monolith so their views are welcome. Do I want to be exposed to the kind of triggering garbage they spew about "All men are guilty until proven innocent in rape culture" and the like?
So I decided "Forget it. Never in a million years."
Face it, they're just not going to listen. Believe me, I've tried myself and had to stop myself from having suicidal thoughts due to the kind of triggering accusations levied my way about "Checking my privledge" amongst other things.
Back in June when the Good Men Project Magazine had just launched, Ms. magazine took us under their generous wing…
Good Men Media Inc., which focuses on creating content geared towards men, has received $500,000 in funding, the firm said on Tuesday.
I never went "pro-MRA". They called me a Mangina about a thousand times over by now.
TMatlack 1 day ago
MRAs consider you as a feminist and mangina, because you are one of the founders of a feminist website called the Good Men Project supported financially by MS. Magazine.
I have to admit however after watching this website since several months, that you are not openly into editing and deleting of comments which do not agree with feminism. –
I never remember to read any scornful remarks from you related to the Men's Rights Movement.
This makes you somewhat different from many other feminists.
Anyway, most MRAs are not much interested in writing articles or comments for this GoodMenProject for various reasons.
Does ANYONE here know what this male privilege is? An example of it? It's basically like the tooth fairy except evil, right?
1.Egalitarian relationships: this equal relationship between client and therapist models for women personal responsibility and assertiveness in other relationships. 2.Power: women are taught to gain and use power in relationships and the possible consequences of their actions. 3.Enhancement of women's strengths: so much of traditional therapy focused on a woman's shortcomings and weaknesses that feminist therapists teach women to look for their own strengths and use them effectively. 4.Non-pathology oriented and non-victim blaming: the medical model is rejected and women's problems are seen as coping mechanisms and viewed in their social context. 5.Education: women are taught to recognize their cognitions that are detrimental and encouraged to educate themselves for the benefit of all women. 6.Acceptance and validation of feelings: feminist therapists value self-disclosure and attempt to remove the we-they barrier of traditional therapeutic relationships.
Ahh, a bunch of leftists arguing over which one is more progressive and egalitarian, which group deserves the halo for shaming Marxism. Tom Matlack, when you try to boast of your egalitarian sanctity among your cultural Marxist brethren (and Sisthren), attempt to redeem men and especially White men, you will be reamed a new one. Love it!!!!
Just stop pretending, drop the mask, and come to the other side.
I love it when feminists say that privilege is invisible to those that have it… as if they are completely 100% aware of their own privileges as women. (yeah yeah, "there's no such thing as female privilege." blahblahblah)
Schwyzer saying that Men's goodness hinges on their rejection of "traditional masculinity" (whatever the fuck that is) pretty much tells you everything you need to know about him. I really hope that this means Tom is finally waking up to what a misandrist little White-Knighter Schwyzer really is.
Also: Amanda Marcotte calling for empathy= HILARIOUS
And finally: To whoever made the claim that MRAs support rapists and murderers and generally not-nice people (which they have, no denial here) I give you the beams in your own eyes
Exhibit A: Valerie Solanas
Exhibit B: Lorena Bobbit
Exhibit C: That nutjob who chopped of her husband's bits and put them in the garbage disposal a few months ago
Exhibit D: Mary Winkler
Exhibit E: Crystal Magnum
Et cetra et cetra
Overall, I enjoyed (what felt like authorised eavesdropping on) the content of the conversation; but I (shockingly) must agree with MediaHound and others that Tweeting doesn't seem a great forum for such complex and preferably nuanced subjects.
If it's called Twitter and what you're doing is Tweeting, doesn't that make everyone Twits?
I agree that so many end up looking like twits!
Twitter also has another marked disadvantage – it allows much language that fits the definition of "Thought Terminating Cliché" to be used. They do tend to be less than 140 characters long! P^)
I do think that some should make sure that any word that is being used in it's specific Jargon Form is marked as [JARGON TERM] ® or ™. On twitter they can even just throw a HashTag in front – but some would be so unhappy being deprived of characters.
So many use terms interchangeably – and assume that others can read their minds and intent.
Maybe Twitter and other social networking systems need to come with a Warning "Assume Clairvoyance Of Other Users At Your Own Risk!".
Wow. The privilege is STRONG with so many here.
Alex, THAT is a great summation! 😉
Morgaine… you have no idea how right you are. Although I suspect your own privilege wasn't the one you were referring to.
Alex – I find it comical that so much that is said has to be filtered through a Lexicon before it is considered. And before that all ambiguity has to be nailed down to figure out your meaning.
Does that use of "here" imply the thread the whole site or all people who read, have read and even will read the site?
So many? How big is the implied group – the 7 who have posted responses as I write – is that "many" to be taken as the group of 7 Quoted from Twitter?
I love the ways that language get used – and how meanings can be explicit or implied – and through ambiguity twisted!
I also note that so many are happy to take a twitter feed – look at so few characters – assume so much and then run to any corner of the Internet where they can claim control and then dissect to their hearts content. IN so many ways the Internet is the biggest obstacle to communication ever invented!
I love the Allies lexicon – which reads as "I want you to agree with me – and if you don't I will not treat you as equal – but still imply you are Ally".
The question that always comes up is how is that word Ally being used. It is both a verb and a noun and as a verb it actually has two different ways to use it.
Some think me annoying – because when there is ambiguity in language I like to get it nailed down so that misunderstandings are avoided – and so many don't like that because they like to be able to play games with that Ambiguity!
Privilege? Is that The VERB – the NOUN – Is it being played with as a VERB to make it TRANSITIVE or even INTRANSITIVE?
The most comical thing in the whole twitter feed is how references get misused – and then assumption and presumption is built by some into a massive Privilege where they assume all references have been read .
I had a teacher at school he was like that – they just assumed that everyone knew what they were talking about. They got very uppity is you asked them first to explain the reference – and even more uppity if you actually pointed out that they were wrong to keep on making assumptions.
I saw so many shadows of that teacher in the twitter feed – and "Privileged" attitudes they displayed.
That word Privilege has so many meanings – and it also has so many implications – such as arrogance, haughtiness, disdain and assumption of Privilege is even linked to behavior such as Bullying!
So could you clarify – what do YOU mean when you say "The privilege is STRONG with so many here."? P^)
As I keep saying Language is a very poor tool for communication!
What Tom came across to me as calling for in his article was space for men to be able to discuss their experiences as men. That seems to be the whole purpose of this site, or I thought it was at least. When Tom notes that most of the people that listen to his talks on manhood are women, or that women are the ones in the comments on his articles, or on Twitter, I think he is pointing out that feminists, mostly women, are dominating the discussion on *both* genders.
I don't think Tom has anything against feminism. I would personally consider Tom a feminist-ally. What I think what Tom is trying to convey is a frustration with feminists who, intentionally or not, are demanding men "play be their rules" when it comes to discussing manhood. I think this comes from a suspicion that when men want to have an active voice and role in talking about gender, it is something regressive and anti-female.
The people attacking Tom want him first to acknowledge them as the gatekeepers: either you agree with them or your feelings and experiences are invalid. And in order for them to validate his feelings and experiences, he must accept their views.
What's at issue is that Tom is talking about men discussing their thoughts and feelings in spaces for men. When men are sharing their stories, and making space for themselves to discuss manhood, it should be organic, on their own terms. Men should not have to check-in first with women/feminists in general to see if their feelings are valid. They are sharing something that is part of their daily existence – their own unique, valid experiences as men.
Reese – interesting observation about gates and gatekeepers.
It reminds me of Cerberus – a chimera – made up of many parts that should not make a whole. Odd how some who traditionally won't agree suddenly managed to combine into an odd beast.
Ally is an intriguing term – a Feminist-ally – which school of feminism is that? Even the Feminists are unhappy to have allegiances between different schools!
Who;s views are to be accepted to become an Ally? Actually NONE – an Ally is accepted on their own merits, not made to conform to another's will and views, That is subjugation.
"Feminist ally" is a term sometimes used by feminist men who feel they are not worthy enough to be called feminists (because they are tainted with the evil of maleness).
Not sure if that was the meaning intended here.
This site *already* implements plenty of gates to keep things on a very pro-feminist / female footing. Those many gates are just not enough for the feminists. They want more and more power. They want more of a boot on men's necks.
I don't think they will ever truly understand how damaging it is because they're focusing on male "privilege" more than they focus on the fact that prejudice isn't tolerated against other groups (at least in most equality circles), so why is it tolerated against men?
FACT: Crime is committed by both genders, both genders cheat on their partners (something that is an abuse of trust and can be very damaging), both genders have reason to fear trusting the other, CDC stats have the same number of women being raped as men being forced to penetrate (BEING penetrated wasn't counted due to lack of reports) suggesting in the last 12 months men were raped AT LEAST as much as women were, and they reported 79.2% of their perpetrators were women. This means yeah more male abusers + male or female victim, but it also means there are A LOT of the male victims had female abusers. Sexual abusers/rapists/whatever term are more commonly male but females aren't that far behind.
If women fear men then quite frankly men should be fearing women, when you look at the rate of physical violence (up to equal levels depending on stats and injuries just as serious for many) and even worse the psychological aggression (equal levels) everyone should be fearing the opposite gender. But does that fear actually help us if the majority of each gender aren't abusive?
I know Mr. Matlack had wanted to cultivate good terms with the feminists, and now it has all come crashing down. The bridges are burning.
Wow who has time to read all that? I went about a third of the way through and I was done.
Oh I read it all – has more twists, turns and drama than a Hollywood Blockbuster.
I'm wondering if it's the basis of a script for the next Mission Impossible! P^)
The more I see people using twitter the more I see wasted communication.
It is so funny – and better than Chinese Whispers!
This sounds like the debates I heard in high school and is on the same level as what is often on day time talk shows. Sad really
[…] decide to have these tough conversations over Twitter is beyond me, but it happens. Recently a highly-publicized conversation took place on Twitter between The Good Men Project founder Tom Matlack and some feminist and anti-racist women and men […]
[…] won't write about the event in great detail here (you can read about it here and here and all over the GMP site) other than to say that articles about the presumption male […]
[…] Marcotte, Jenn Pozner and a few others joined in this row with Tom and Hugo in a now-very-famous Twitter war where I believe a lot of people acted in ways that were not productive, or even healthy. No, I […]
[…] decide to have these tough conversations over Twitter is beyond me, but it happens. Recently a highly-publicized conversation took place on Twitter between The Good Men Project founder Tom Matlack and some feminist and anti-racist women and men […]
[…] snow white and the huntsman snow white and the huntsman philip rivers 11 11 11 meaning miracle berry billy crystal veterans day thank you Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]
[…] I simply wanted to have a conversation with Hugo about it first 2) The name of another post, "The Wrath of the Feminists" came from Jenn Pozner herself — if it is "disrespectful and dismissive" […]
[…] blow-up between GMP founder Tom Matlack and a number of well-known feminist writers. (For more, see here, and here, and […]
[…] However, there is an element of humor to this story, as a clearly clueless Roseanne Barr rises from the morass to take poorly-aimed potshots at men through Twitter. […]
[…] from his position as editor and contributor to the website). The debate started after an intense Twitter back-and-forth which was posted on GMP under the title "The Wrath of The Feminists". Schwyzer […]
[…] neerhaalde als vijandige vrouwen die mannen verbaal in elkaar zouden slaan. De site sprak van The Wrath of the Feminists, een taalgebruik waarbij apocalyptische beelden opdoemen, van schuimbekkende dragonders die met […]
[…] for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet Box WordPress PluginThe Good Men Project has been a real sh*tshow lately. The site's founder, Tom Matlack, found himself labeled an ALLY FAIL by radical […]
[…] a recent Twitter debate between a bunch of people, including Tom Matlack, Hugo Schwyzer, and two well-respected feminists, […]
[…] on twitter my friend Brennan linked to an article that linked to this twitter stream. I don't recommend you read the whole thing a) because it's very long, […]
[…] The Twitter discussion in response to Tom Matlack's Being a Dude is a Good Thing has been fascinating. Much of it is archived here, summarized in the unhelpfully titled "The Wrath of the Feminists." […]
[…] The Wrath of The Feminists: A Discussion of Masculinity, Gender, and Feminism […]


text:
Sept. 26, 2009
MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. -- The Washington State men's and women's cross country teams took fifth place in the Div. I Gold Races at the Roy Griak Invitational Saturday at the Les Bolstad Golf Course in Minneapolis, Minn.
The Cougar men scored 108 points and were led by the 11th place finish of senior Sam Ahlbeck (Renton) who finished the 8000m race in a time of 25 minutes, 7 seconds. The rest of the WSU scorers included freshman Andrew Kimpel, 19th (25:18), senior Mark Moeller, 23rd (25:22), sophomore Jono Lafler, 25th (25:23) and senior Dan Geib, 30th (25:29). Cougar men competing but not scoring were sophomore Justin Englund, 44th (25:49) and junior David Hickerson, 60th (26:12).
Iowa State was the top squad among the 18 men's teams with 71 points, and Minnesota's Hassan Mead was the top individual with a time of 24:37.5.
"We are upset we did not place higher today but being 35 points out of winning the whole thing, and be 100 points better than last year, that is a little frustrating for the guys," WSU coach Pete Julian said. "The top five teams were very close. We are dramatically better than last year and we are not a developing program anymore. I think we could have won today and it was an opportunity that got away. We are the real deal now and we will watch the teams ahead of us move up in the rankings and so this leaves a bitter taste in our mouths. Individually, Sam ran a very smart and controlled race and led the team. That was nice to see and to have the other individuals come through. We had a true freshman, Andrew Kimpel, finish in the top 20 and you don't see that very often in a major invitational. That is exciting for the future of the Cougar program."
The Washington State women's team scored 177 points with senior Lisa Egami (Coquitlam, B.C.) leading the Cougs with a 19th place finish in the 6000m with a time of 22:28. Other Cougar scorers included senior Chelsea VanDeBrake, 25th (22:46), sophomore Emily Farrar, 40th (23:23), freshman Alyssa Andrews, 46th (23:33), and junior Amanda Andrews, 47th (23:35). WSU women competing out of the scoring were junior Ashlee Wall, 64th (23:59), and senior Marisa Sandoval, 72nd (24:15).
Iowa State won the 17-team women's competition with 31 points and Minnesota's Megan Duwell was the individual winner in a time of 21:00.4.
"The women had a strong but not outstanding day," Julian said. "They put themselves in a position for success and they ran strong. I am fully confident that this team will only get better. This is the best performance the women's team has ever had at this meet. Across the board, both men and women, we are significantly improved. We are pleased with our effort today and pleased with the direction the program is going but at the same time, to not win at a meet like this is a little bit frustrating but will be a great motivator for the next three to six weeks."
The Cougar cross country teams next competition is Oct. 17 at the Pre-National Meet at Terre Haute, Ind.
Men's Results Roy Griak Cross Country Invitational (Les Bolstad Golf Course, Minneapolis, Minn. 8,000m) September 26, 2009 Men's Team Results: 1. Iowa State 71, 2. Oklahoma 74, 3. Duke 94, 4. Minnesota 101, 5. Washington State 108, 6. Michigan State 147, 7. Dayton 179, 8. Air Force Academy 223, 9. Navy 234, 10. Utah Valley 322, 11. Army 327, 12. High Point 348, 13. Missouri 374, 14. South Dakota State 394, 15. Drake 461, 16. Northern Iowa 473, 17. South Dakota 495, 18. Lipscomb 529. Top Five Individuals: 1. Hassan Mead (Minnesota) 24:37.5; 2. Guor Majak, (Iowa State) 24:50.3; 3. Bo Waggoner (Duke) 24:53.3; 4. Ben Blankenship (Minnesota) 24:56.9; 5. Justin Tyner, (Air Force Academy) 24:57.5. WSU Results: 11. Sam Ahlbeck 25:07; 19. Andrew Kimpel 25:18; 23. Mark Moeller 25:22; 25. Jono Lafler 25:23; 30. Dan Geib 25:29; 44. Justin Englund 25:49; 60. David Hickerson 26:12.
Women's Results Roy Griak Cross Country Invitational (Les Bolstad Golf Course, Minneapolis, Minn. 6,000m) September 26, 2009 Women's Team Results: 1. Iowa State 31, 2. Minnesota 48, 3. Michigan State 75, 4. Utah Valley 122, 5. Washington State 177, 6. Connecticut 224, 7. Alabama-Birmingham 225, 8. Oklahoma 245, 9. Air Force Academy 246, 10. South Dakota State 254, 11. Army 280, 12. Northwestern 293, 13. High Point 360, 14. Drake 284, 14. Northern Illinois 422, 16. Lipscomb 424, 17. South Dakota 428. Top Five Individuals: 1. Megan Duwell (Minnesota) 21:00.4; 2. Lisa Koll (Iowa State) 21:12.7; 3. Betsy Saina (Iowa State) 21:27.4; 4. Emily MacLeod (Michigan State) 21:40.8; 5. Carlie Green (Michigan State) 21:43.9. WSU Results: 19. Lisa Egami 22:28; 25. Chelsea VanDeBrake 22:46; 40. Emily Farrar 23:23; 46. Alyssa Andrews 23:33; 47. Amanda Andrews 23:35; 64. Ashlee Wall 23:59; 72. Marisa Sandoval 24:15.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Moisture (water vapor) is present in ambient air as a gas and cannot be filtered. Membrane fibers present in the MMD Series remove water vapor to prevent it from condensing into harmful liquid water droplets inside compressed air systems. The MMD Series membrane dryer utilizes a spiral wrapped bundle of tubeshaped membrane fibers to remove water vapor from the compressed air stream. These fibers are engineered to separate moisture without reducing the oxygen content in the compressed air stream. The MMD Series is a great option for appliciations such as powder painting, laboratory instruments and food packaging machines with pneumatic components which cannot tolerate the presence of any moisture.
Reciprocating Air Compressors
Rotary Screw Air Compressors
Air Treatment
Condensate Managment
Gardner Denver... the Answer
You get total product support now and for years to come from our dedicated international team of professional distributors, our Master Distribution Center with its extensive genuine replacement parts inventory, our Remanufacturing Center, and our skilled, factory-trained technicians.
For more information, or if you need help locating a compressor sales or service professional in your area, please click here.


text:
Editors' Note: The "Download Now" link directs you to the Android Market where you must continue the download process. This download may not be available in some countries.
Publisher's Description+
What's new in this version:
It is a dark time for the Rebellion. Evading the dreaded Imperial Starfleet, a group of freedom fighters has established a new secret base on the remote ice world of Hoth. Unfortunately the evil Darth Vader discovers their hideout, and the desperate Rebel birds must escape the AT-ATs and Pigtroopers hot on their trail. But the Rebels have an ace up their sleeve with the debut of PRINCESS LEIA!


text:
For more information about this meeting, contact Boris Kalinin, Stephanie Zerby, Anatole Katok, Federico Rodriguez Hertz.
|Polynomials, eigenvalues, and Thurston's Theorem
|Center for Dynamics and Geometry Seminars
|Sarah Koch, University of Michigan
|In William Thurston's last paper, "Entropy in Dimension One," he completely characterizes which numbers arise as exp(entropy(f)), where f is a critically finite real polynomial map of a closed interval. Inspired by his work (and the spectacular fractal picture on page 1 of his manuscript), we consider a particular dynamical quantity associated to critically finite rational maps. Following earlier work of Thurston, a critically finite rational map induces a holomorphic endomorphism on a Teichmueller space, and this endomorphism has a unique fixed point. We study the spectrum of the derivative of this endomorphism and prove that there is a prominent spectral gap in the case of quadratic polynomials. We plot a picture for this data (analogous to Thurston's entropy picture), revealing some incredible fractal structure. This is joint work with X. Buff and A. Epstein.
Room Reservation Information
|Room Number:
|11 / 13 / 2013
|03:35pm - 04:35pm


text:
Nikkei Collapses; Closes Morning Session Down 2.7%
- Printer-friendly version
- Jan 21, 2010 10:36 PM
- 43
So triple digit down day tommarow?
I am sure the Plunge Protection Team is getting warmed up...worry not.
Nah, they will declare the whole thing a computer error and have a big do over. No sweat, make everyone whole again.
Tyler is right...the system crashes only on down days.That is a story in it's own right.I would like to see the outages/volume/direction presented graphically.
As if I would be surprised.
Correction imminent?I say no.Try crash.EPIC FAIL
The bankers are already holes anyway Ms.There is no need to make them hole.Oops...spelling error mistakeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
null command
system crashhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Buy Buy Buy!!!
buy the dips!
to the moon!
signed leo
There's never been a better time to buy Chinese Solar Stocks. Back up the truck! Boo-yah! (fade to bulltard memorial service....)
leo needs to take the red pill.
yeh gold is a terrible investment.
It goes now! This is the last pullback before the great hyper-diaper-inflation-nation comes home to roost.
I think the oligarchs got together and said exactly that. Now is a buying opportunity for worthless stocks and precious metals.
Need to rule out other causes - including petulance over Obama's now found populism...
Give me a
Give me an
Give me a
Give me a
Give me a
Give me an
Give me a
Give me a
What do you have?
We're f'd.
my name is leo and i love equities....
WWCD - What Would Cramer Do?
He'd scream a bunch of unintelligible gibberish at the top of his lungs and then hit a bunch of buttons that make funny noises.
Buy Buy Buy wheres my gong I love china erin burnetts tits buy buy buy! this is a bull this is a bear weeoo weeoo buy gld i am an illuminant my charitable trust i went to harvard used to run on GS I worship satan buy satan buy satan!!!
He'd make a massive slew of mutually contradictory predictions, then go back later and point out which ones were correct
now the "real" safe haven GOLD is up when the markets are down, and that's how it's supposed to be. unfortunately during US hours we have the PPT scums who rig the markets and pretend 'paper' gold is real gold.
Don't forget naked shorting of gold by issuing 100x the paper certificates that they actually hold in physical, thereby fucking up the supply/demand equation.
yes the yellow metal is up all of $2 at 22:16:56 on Thu January 21 2010
These markets can't think on their own, we go up, they go up, we go down, they go down, didn't you have a post on the correlation a few months ago?
Why do they even bother with their own stock markets these days, just have a 24 hour market for all stocks, with all the stocks priced in gold.
HSI fixed now....down 2.8%
thx lizzy.
invading canada would make most americans feel much better about obama.
Colbert is after you guys big time, watch out!
Morgan Stanley indicates that the Yen is the favourite currncy to short
Unless the overnight futures brigade manages to decelarte this reversal,
aaah, yes.....
does the street decide to throw a snit as they have done previously and just let her go south as part of the "world will end if we don't get our way" shot across the bow? this is a tried and true strategy and hey, if you think about it, there is a hell of a lot more juice to be squeezed going from 1150 to 850, say, than 1150 to 1450, know what I mean? they could drop that spx bugger in no time with a little fear and make a fortune. it would be easy to drop it 300 pts and even the most bullish of bulls would admit running her up another 300 points in a month might be a bit too tall of an order.
tonight's eminis action ought to shed some light on this as well as what strategy helicopter boy is going to adopt to the threat on his continued employment
dh, did you see my comments earlier, where the fuck was Heli Ben today, I didn't see him at the press conference, was he there and I missed him?
Awful strange if he missed it, given he is the main regulator of the BHCs and all.
ghost...my recollection is that the Fed chairman is rarely seen with Presidents on these matters as a matter of protocol and the whole "independence" thing. I cannot say this with absolute certainty but I think that this is the usual case. perhaps someone else can confirm, rebut.
i would point out that Austin Goolsbee seems to have been reincarnated along with Volcker....keep an eye out on the Goolsbee dynamic, it could be telling.
Must be a big treasury auction coming up and they had to generate demand.
Hmm... stocks are flat on YTD.
Every one ZH is cheering, feeling vindicated.
Gold is down 10%, dollar is up 5%, oil is down 10%, rates are low.
Hmm... call me when we break a 10% correction on some major event. Otherwise, 1400 YE then 1600 YE 2011. Steady recovery is pretty much in-place.
The ball is not in the US. It's in the EU. Steady recovery, good luck.
what do you think, where is this "steady recovery" going to come from this time? Are households and private businesses (w/o financial institutions) going to load another 25 trillion US-dollars of debt onto their balance sheets over the next 10 years? A doubling of private debt in US every ten years has been the fuel for economic growth in US and the world economy for the last three decades. Can they do it again?
Every one ZH is cheering, feeling vindicated
I don't think vindication plays into this issue.
More importantly, how do you justify you 1400 YE and 1600 2011 YE targets. Please enlighten, what sort of steady recovery are you seeing (housing, employment)?
Don't be a party pooper.Tents are a big growth area, as are portable cook stoves.With the apocalyptic rise in homelessness due to job loss and concomitant loss of housing, more people are living in parks than ever before!
Everything is perfect.Just because the record number of unemployed won't be buying anything is no reason to suspect a domino effect of dependent businesses failing.Life is good.
Ok....you might have a point.
Ok...we are truly screwed.
bigbag, i think you are being foolish. There are numerous signs of a serious top, it just took a while to actually happen. On a very simple technical basis, we have already violated the third fan from the 3 fan rule. the volum has been awful, there are a ton of technical divergneces, and a weekly MACD cross, as well as the leading markets of china and gold already having significant corections.
In financial markets as in child psychology, one must learn to appreciate the difference between a tantrum and a correction.
Tomorrow, a simmering pout.
Dulces sueños,
Señor F.B. de Abarca
But they have been giving the child anti-depressants since around spx 850. And the damn brat is getting a tolerance.
How about this for a strategy. Pump equities up up up. Then deflate significantly before the year is up. Wouldnt this cause people to sell equities and buy treasuries with what cash they have left from equities. Then perhaps uncle s could tax them for the short term gains while getting the investment as well. burn the candle at both ends. Has everyone got their bonuses yet?
The PPT is discontinued for awhile as punishment for defaming Kennedy's seat.
what is the "DMA" ... i can't find it in any of my technical analysis books.
do you mean the daily SMA ?
if so: then say / label / notate it the correct way ~ "the daily 20-SMA" .... OR .... say "the daily 20 SMA".
that's it; real simple ... and then you'd be accurate instead of regurgitating incorrect nonsense that only retail folk spew.


text:
News Center
APSCUF provides members and the public with important and timely updates on issues that impact faculty, coaches, and students at the State System of Higher Education institutions. To receive up-to-date information, sign up for the APSCUF blog and follow us on Twitter.
Read the latest news in our In the News section
Read news releases from APSCUF and recent news stories on higher education and other hot issues in Harrisburg.
Additional resources for the news media
- Get the facts about APSCUF and PA's State System of Higher Education
- APSCUF President Dr. Kenneth M. Mash - Photo (JPEG)
- APSCUF Logo (JPEG)
- APSCUF Torch (JPEG)


text:
Trent Whitehead drives in game-winning run in 12th inning
April 22, 2011
HOUSTON, Texas - Four consecutive two-out hits in the ninth inning and a RBI single from Trent Whitehead in the top of the 12th gave East Carolina (26-12, 7-6) a 5-4 come from behind victory over Houston (19-20, 6-4) Thursday night in Conference USA action at Cougar Field.
With the score knotted at four in the top of the 12th inning, ECU took a 5-4 lead when Whitehead singled home Jack Reinheimer from second base with a base knock to left field. Reinheimer walked to start the frame and moved into scoring position when Corey Thompson laid down a sac bunt back to the pitcher Dakota Dill for the first out of the inning. Whitehead, who collected a game-best three hits, drilled 1-0 offering to left center scoring Reinheimer for the go-ahead run.
Houston had a chance to tie the game in the bottom half of the frame when Joel Ansley reached on a throwing error by Reinheimer on a ball hit deep at short that pulled John Wooten off the bag putting runners at the corners with two outs. But Seth Simmons closed the door on a possible Cougar rally striking out Landon Appling for the final out of the game.
Down to its last out and trailing 4-1 in the ninth, ECU collected four straight base hits to tie the game at four. Chase McDonald smoked his second home run of the season, first Youngstown State on Feb. 20, sending a 0-1 offering to left field pulling ECU within two, 4-2. Philip Clark followed with a single deep in the hole behind second base and Jonathan Holt laced a pinch hit single through the left side putting runners on first and second. Ben Fultz followed with a game tying two-RBI triple to right center that hit off the top of the wall just below the scoreboard scoring both Clark and Holt.
Simmons improved to 5-1on the season after making his 18th appearance of the season. The NCBWA Stopper-of-the-Year Watch List candidate tossed three scoreless innings of relief allowing one hits and striking out five. Starter Mike Wright worked a career-best 9.0 innings where he surrendered four runs (three earned) on six hits with seven strikeouts and one walk.
Dill (0-2) took the loss allowing after working two-third of an inning allowing a run (earned) on no hits and a walk. Houston starter Jared Ray went four innings in his first start in nearly a year giving up a run (earned) on three hits with one strikeout. Matt Creel, who made his 15th appearance of the year, was touched for three runs (all earned) on 10 hits with four strikeouts. Dustin Fuerst faced two batters recording an out and a walk, while Chase Wellbrock closed out the contest surrendering one hit in one full innings of relief.
The Pirates jumped out to a 1-0 lead in the third when Tim Younger ground out to second scoring McDonald, who doubled off the batters eye in center to start the frame. Clark moved McDonald to third on a perfect sac bunt down the first base line.
Houston tied the game at one on a Mike Wright wild pitch in the fifth inning. John Cannon singled through the left side to start the stanza and took second on Creel's sac bunt and third on Codey Morehouse's fly ball to center. Cannon would cross home on a wild pitch that catcher Zach Wright couldn't locate around his feet tying the game at one.
In the sixth, Houston took a 4-1 lead thanks to four consecutive hits including a two-RBI double by M.P. Cokinos. Ryan Still singled to center with one out, Caleb Ramsey followed with a single through the right side and Chase Jensen loaded the bases with an infield single behind the bag at second, where Younger made a sensational diving play to keep the ball from going to center. Cokinos lifted a 1-2 offering down the left field line where Fultz was unable to handle the ball on the hop clearing the bases for the Cougars.
Offensively the Pirates doubled up the Cougars on hits, 14-7, and recorded their fifth-straight multi-hit game. Seven of nine batters collected at least one hit on the night with Whitehead leading the way going 3-for-6. Clark, Fultz and McDonald added two hits each, while five others had a base knock including two pinch hit singles. Reinheimer extended his current hit streak to seven games with his single to right field, while Clark (6 games) and Thompson (5 games) also kept their hit streaks alive.
Both teams will return to the diamond Friday night with a first pitch scheduled for 7:30 p.m. (EST). ECU will send Kevin Brandt (5-0, 1.38 ERA) to the hill against Jordan Lewis (3-1, 3.83 ERA).


text: Type 1 DiabetesWhat is type 1 diabetes?In type 1 diabetes, the body can't make insulin. Insulin is needed to help glucose enter cells for energy. Without insulin, glucose builds up in the blood. This causes high blood glucose or high blood sugar. Type 1 diabetes may also be known as:Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM)Juvenile diabetesBrittle diabetesSugar diabetesType 1 diabetes accounts for 5% to 10% of all diagnosed cases of diabetes in the U.S. Type 1 diabetes most often develops in children or young adults, but can start at any age.What causes type 1 diabetes?The cause of type 1 diabetes is unknown. It's thought that genetic and environmental factors be involved.The body's immune system attacks and destroys the cells in the pancreas that make insulin. Insulin lets glucose to enter the cells for energy. When glucose can't enter the cells, it builds up in the blood. This deprives the cells of nutrition. It also results in high blood sugar. People with type 1 diabetes must take daily insulin shots and regularly check their blood sugar levels.What are the symptoms of type 1 diabetes?Type 1 diabetes often appears suddenly. Symptoms may include:Unusual thirstFrequent passing urineExtreme hunger but loss of weightBlurred visionNausea and vomitingExtreme weakness and fatigueIrritability and mood changesIn children, symptoms may be similar to those of having the flu.The symptoms of type 1 diabetes may look like other conditions or health problems. Always consult your doctor for a diagnosis.How is type 1 diabetes diagnosed?There are several ways to diagnose diabetes. It is best for the tests to be repeated on a second day to make sure of the diagnosis.A1C. The hemoglobin A1C test measures your average blood glucose for the past 2 to 3 months. Diabetes is diagnosed at an A1C of greater than or equal to 6.5%.Fasting plasma glucose (FPG). This test checks your blood glucose levels after fasting overnight. You may have water before this test is done, but nothing else. Diabetes is diagnosed at a fasting blood glucose of greater than or equal to 126 mg/dl.Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). This is a 2-hour test that checks your blood glucose levels before and 2 hours after you drink a sugary drink. This test tells your doctor how your body processes glucose. Diabetes is diagnosed at a 2-hour blood glucose of greater than or equal to 200 mg/dl.Random glucose test. This blood test is done at any time of the day. Diabetes is diagnosed at blood glucose of greater than or equal to 200 mg/dl with the symptoms hyperglycemia or hyperglycemic crisis.How is type 1 diabetes treated?Your health care provider will figure out the best treatment based on:How old you areYour overall health and medical historyHow sick you areHow well you can handle specific medications, procedures, or therapiesHow long the condition is expected to lastYour opinion or preferenceIf you have type 1 diabetes, you will need daily shots of insulin to keep your blood sugar level in normal ranges. Other parts of treatment may include:Eating a diet to help manage blood sugar levelsExercising to help the body use blood sugar efficientlyMonitoring blood sugar levels several times a day, as directed by your doctorHaving regular hemoglobin A1c testing. This is recommended at least twice a year or more often if your blood sugar level stays too high.Research is underway to find better ways to manage diabetes. This includes looking for other way to take insulin such as through inhalers, pills, or pumps. They have also identified some genetic markers for type 1 diabetes. Pancreas and islet cell transplants are considered experimental treatment.What are the complications of type 1 diabetes? Type 1 diabetes may cause the following:Hypoglycemia. This is low blood sugar, sometimes called an insulin reaction. It occurs when blood sugar drops below 70 mg/dl.Hyperglycemia. This is high blood sugar, occurs when blood sugar is too high. It can be a sign that diabetes is not well controlled.Ketoacidosis. This is a form of severe dehydration due to untreated or poorly treated diabetes. It can result in loss of consciousness or brain damage.Long-term complications of uncontrolled type 1 diabetes include:Heart diseaseKidney diseaseEye problemsNerve problemsFoot problemsKey points Type 1 diabetes is an immune system disorder in which the body's immune system destroys, or tries to destroy, the cells in the pancreas that make insulin.When glucose can't enter the cells, it builds up in the blood. This deprives the cells of nutrition.For type 1 diabetes, you need daily insulin injections. You also need to regularly check your blood sugar levels.Next stepsTips to help you get the most from a visit to your health care provider:Before your visit, write down questions you want answered.Bring someone with you to help you ask questions and remember what your provider tells you.At the visit, write down the names of new medicines, treatments, or tests, and any new instructions your provider gives you.If you have a follow-up appointment, write down the date, time, and purpose for that visit.Know how you can contact your provider if you have questions. Health Encyclopedia A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Search Health Library


text:
Peter Theo Curtis, 45, (an American journalist who often writes under the name Theo Padnos,) has been released from al-Nusra militant captors in Syria. The al-Nusra Front is a militant Syrian rebel group with ties to al-Qaeda. Curtis was released to United Nations representatives in the Golan Heights, an area under the control of Israel. He was given a medical examination and will soon be returning home to the United States.
This story comes as a tremendous relief after last week's murder of another American journalist, James Foley, 40, by the Islamic extremist group called simply the "Islamic State." The Islamic State, or IS, is the newest term for a group that has also been known as ISIS and ISIL, and started as an off-shoot of al-Qaeda in 2013. As one public radio reporter said, "You know a group is extreme when even members of al-Qaeda say, 'Oh those guys are bad.'" IS members practice a militant extremist form of Sunni Islam, and has a goal of instituting Shariah law worldwide and killing all those who do not convert to their brand of Islam. They began their actions in 2013 by capturing Raqqa in Eastern Syria, moving on to control Falluja in Western Iraq. In June they took over Mosul, and in July their numbers grew as they recruited over 6,000 Syrians to their cause.
Hundreds of Syrians have been killed in the last couple of days, and today, IS seized control of the Syrian government's airbase in Raqqa province.
In the last month, IS has targeted any and all people who do not adhere to their very specific ideology. The group has driven these people out of their homes and their neighborhoods, forcing some groups to retreat to mountain tops where food and water was not available. The United States has been trying to help these people via air drops of food and water, but getting supplies to these desolate areas has been difficult. Innocent civilan men, women and children have been murdered. IS has proudly decapitated many of these victims and put their heads on sticks which have been prominently displayed in town squares.
IS aired a video online of the beheading of James Foley. Since this video aired, both government and law enforcement entities have been actively trying to identify the man who was wearing a hood and dressed all in black who killed the journalist. This man spoke with a British accent, and Fox news has speculated that this man is a former rapper from London, named Abdel Majed Abdel Barry. For more information on this story, see the following link-
The secret service in Britain has not given a comment on this theory but has said that they are using both voice recognition and photo recognition technology to help in identifying the British sounding terrorist. Over 500 Britons have been recruited to leave their homes and join militants in fighting Jihad. This turn of events is bizarre, but unfortunately not unique, as the United States has also lost citizens who have decided to go to various parts of the Middle East and fight for Muslim extremist causes. For more information, see the following link-
Curtis, like Foley, was kidnapped in 2012. Curtis was in Turkey en route to Syria, while Foley was already in Syria when he was abducted. Secretary of State John Kerry has issued a statement saying that he is relieved and grateful for Theo's release, and has indicated that it took the work of more than twenty countries, as well as the support of The United Nations, to bring Curtis home.
If you found this article to be of interest, please click on "Subscribe" underneath the title of the article to receive free automatic email updates when this author writes again.


text:
Aug 13, 2009 11:50 AM
We gotta admit we often overlook the great treasures that Banana Republic has to offer. Their trinkets are so breathtaking that when we finally took a gander we were miffed that we hadn't taken notice sooner! This Banana Republic Locket Bib Necklace ($98) feels both costumey and fine jewelry-y and isn't too flimsy that it'll break in a day. The well-crafted piece is a surefire way to instantly "up" an outfit and leave the eye going straight to your neckline area. Time for the age-old test of asking your date what color your eyes are to see where he's been peeking!
If you've got a product or service that you'd like to promote on Outblush, click here to find out about our advertising opportunities.
Outblush is a blog for girls who love to shop. Our staff digs up the best clothes, home stuff, beauty items, and more. New items are posted every day — bookmark us and check out: