Comment in a newspaper blog mentioning child abuse:
A cohort study of the ADHEALTH data set indicates that children in
ssm families are 7 times more likely to suffer sexual abuse than those
not. Pretty dreadful future awaits children caught in the 'marriages' of
the 1% of homosexuals who bother. Even more parlous with Dennis
Altman's disdain for exclusive sexual relationships in the homosexual
community. Small numbers overall, but why condemn children to something
so obviously fraught with risk.
Then of course, there
is the systematic denial of a full parental relationship of such
children with at least one of their living natural parents...it would be
hard to design something worse on purpose.
20170429
20170425
20170415
Weakness
Have you ever had the joy of an interview with a moron employer, one who thinks they are a clinical psychologist, and asks you to give your opinion of your greatest weakness/weaknesses?
Here's the answer:
On a serious note, you could start a dialog:
'Tell me, what are you looking for in this question? Are you looking for an answer that will elimate me from the job, are you seeking my approach to self-development or self-management?. You see, you have to be careful here as with some candidates you could invite an action for discrimination with this question. Imagine if I said that the colour of my skin is my greatest weaknesss in the job market, and you don't employ me...next meeting would be in court."
Here's the answer:
"You want me to state my weakness? That wouldn't be in my interest would it? I could trot out a cliche about how I'm a perfectionist, but you've heard those all before. I'm here to talk about my talents and strengths and how I can bring them to bear on this company's challenges"Read more at https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2017/04/killer-interview-question-what-is-your-biggest-weakness-thats-not-a-secret-strength/#Hr1Z7kjkC4ZdKX9S.99
You can also clarify...probe back: 'tell me about some of the challenges of this job so I can ensure that I tell you about appropraite weaknesses that will be sure to make me unemployable.'
'Sure, but would you first tell me some of the greatest weaknesses of this company.'
'That sounds a bit scary, but if you would tell me your greatest weaknesses, being that I'd be working for you' that would start me on the road'.
Or, to really go out on a bang: 'I go postal whenever people ask me stupid questions.'
On a serious note, you could start a dialog:
'Tell me, what are you looking for in this question? Are you looking for an answer that will elimate me from the job, are you seeking my approach to self-development or self-management?. You see, you have to be careful here as with some candidates you could invite an action for discrimination with this question. Imagine if I said that the colour of my skin is my greatest weaknesss in the job market, and you don't employ me...next meeting would be in court."
20170408
20170402
Absolutely!
Our highly paid, and presumable highly educated pals in the media (think: TV) have only one word to confirm statements: "Absolutely".
Here are some alternatives, so they can flourish their great education, flexible minds and acquaintance with English:
Yes
Sure
Certainly
That's right
Yes
I agree
Are you sure?
I think so too
Yes
Hopefully
I hope so
Yes...
The next episode of helpful tips on communicating will deal with the reflexive and redundant cant "in place" (except where used for books on shelves).
Here are some alternatives, so they can flourish their great education, flexible minds and acquaintance with English:
Yes
Sure
Certainly
That's right
Yes
I agree
Are you sure?
I think so too
Yes
Hopefully
I hope so
Yes...
The next episode of helpful tips on communicating will deal with the reflexive and redundant cant "in place" (except where used for books on shelves).
20170331
Dignity and respect??
Letter to a local paper on Trent Zimmerman's whinge for 'dignity and respect'.
Trent Zimmerman wants the same dignity and status for pairs of homosexuals as male and female couples who marry. He talks about marriage ‘equality’. But there can be no equality with obvious functional difference and the status of a pair that cannot reproduce will never be the same as couples that preponderantly marry with the prospect of family in view.
Very obviously, without reproductive capability (and I know some marry without this in mind, or possible) a homosexual marriage is hollow. Nor can I see the public interest in such a marriage which is reproductively inert.
The public interest in marriage is very real, as it brings order to the raising of children and ensures that the parents and their responsibilities are recognised. It also serves to promote the succour the mother during a child’s early years when she is less likely to be able to work.
The man and woman who marry also demonstrate a commitment to a complete change in their lives for their children, including providing their children with their life-long company. Thus the honour and dignity afforded them. None of this occurs with homosexuals, and any children brought into that arrangement are unavoidably deprived of the daily company of at least one parent; thus are they made the playthings of adult make-believe, condemned to unavoidable risk of the ‘cinderella’ syndrome.
Trent Zimmerman wants the same dignity and status for pairs of homosexuals as male and female couples who marry. He talks about marriage ‘equality’. But there can be no equality with obvious functional difference and the status of a pair that cannot reproduce will never be the same as couples that preponderantly marry with the prospect of family in view.
Very obviously, without reproductive capability (and I know some marry without this in mind, or possible) a homosexual marriage is hollow. Nor can I see the public interest in such a marriage which is reproductively inert.
The public interest in marriage is very real, as it brings order to the raising of children and ensures that the parents and their responsibilities are recognised. It also serves to promote the succour the mother during a child’s early years when she is less likely to be able to work.
The man and woman who marry also demonstrate a commitment to a complete change in their lives for their children, including providing their children with their life-long company. Thus the honour and dignity afforded them. None of this occurs with homosexuals, and any children brought into that arrangement are unavoidably deprived of the daily company of at least one parent; thus are they made the playthings of adult make-believe, condemned to unavoidable risk of the ‘cinderella’ syndrome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)