EPTWhat I cannot for the life of me understand, however, are kids today not being able to speak or write properly. That kills me.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8029
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
What I cannot for the life of me understand, however, are kids today not being able to speak or write properly. That kills me. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: That's such a dumb rule. Now shoulders are taboo? I don't know how appropriate 'now' is since it's been the rule for decades/centuries. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:16 Danglars wrote: I don't know how appropriate 'now' is since it's been the rule for decades/centuries. Where the hell can I find this rule of shoulders being taboo? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:16 Danglars wrote: I don't know how appropriate 'now' is since it's been the rule for decades/centuries. Appeal to tradition isn't entirely compelling. Don't forget marriage used to mean property. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:24 Mohdoo wrote: Appeal to tradition isn't entirely compelling. Don't forget marriage used to mean property. That is the standard dress code for most law firms I've worked at, with the exception of open toed shoes for women. | ||
Falling
Canada11607 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: That's such a dumb rule. Now shoulders are taboo? If you want a sense of decorum in the House and not want people to show up in beach wear or sweat pants, a line must be drawn somewhere. Where ever the line is, it may seem silly, but without the line you can be sure people are going to sink to the lowest common denominator. Apparently, they have things like 'ties of shame'. So it's not like they are after one gender on dress code. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: If you are not able to attempt to see the world through the eyes that are less fortunate than you, then you have your own problems to fix. I've only blamed my shortcomings on myself, not the "Man" or anything like that. I didn't try hard enough. Simple as that. I can see the world from the viewpoints of the haves and have nots. Because I've had both experiences. What I cannot for the life of me understand, however, are kids today not being able to speak or write properly. That kills me. Certainly, this can also be taken too far. The more activist liberals in my area will say and have said that I don't get to have an opinion on such and such a matter because I am a white male. As such, my small measure of success is born off black oppression and owes little to hard work or sacrifice because all that was originally due to institutional and societal privilege. I don't mean to disparage economic oppurtunities and all that, but undoubtably the dialogue can be taken too far in the political realm and prompt backlash that doesn't help problems with urban schools, cultural norms, or educational outcomes. I'm pretty pessimistic on future solutions given the interaction between political rhetoric/political power and education policy, poverty, and crime (juvenile delinquency). | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:24 Plansix wrote: I don't have a huge objection to the rule. Men have to wear suit jackets. I think the rules are super dated and they should update them to account for the heat. That is the standard dress code for most law firms I've worked at, with the exception of open toed shoes for women. Yeah, I suppose I am just taking the perspective that whenever someone actually suffers for things like this, it is worth pointing out that its stupid and should change. I'm saying the rule is dumb, not that the rule isn't real. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:24 Mohdoo wrote: Appeal to tradition isn't entirely compelling. Don't forget marriage used to mean property. Saying "now shoulders are taboo" in an article that says "women now need" and a post that says "apparently it is Paul Ryan's policy" implies recent malicious sexist change. Can you read it again and conclude that this is a false charge given its longevity? For the sake of agreeing upon facts prior to opinion? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:27 Mohdoo wrote: Yeah, I suppose I am just taking the perspective that whenever someone actually suffers for things like this, it is worth pointing out that its stupid and should change. I'm saying the rule is dumb, not that the rule isn't real. It is literally outside the well of Congress. I think the women's attire could use a little updating(like make rules for women's jackets and allow open toed shoes, maybe change rule for jackets during the summer), but people should be expected to dress for business. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:30 Danglars wrote: Saying "now shoulders are taboo" in an article that says "women now need" and a post that says "apparently it is Paul Ryan's policy" implies recent malicious sexist change. Can you read it again and conclude that this is a false charge given its longevity? For the sake of agreeing upon facts prior to opinion? I'm being lazy, sorry. I was just chucking my thought of "that's some stupid shit" over the fence. I'm not saying Paul Ryan or republicans are seeking to harm women or something like that. All I am saying is that women should be allowed to display their shoulders at work. On July 08 2017 02:31 Plansix wrote: It is literally outside the well of Congress. I think the women's attire could use a little updating(like make rules for women's jackets and allow open toed shoes, maybe change rule for jackets during the summer), but people should be expected to dress for business. I suppose I find myself wondering what purpose it serves other than ceremony. Dress jackets are ridiculous in any context unless you are cold. It feels like being required to wear a kimono. It just doesn't serve a purpose. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46419 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:30 Danglars wrote: Saying "now shoulders are taboo" in an article that says "women now need" and a post that says "apparently it is Paul Ryan's policy" implies recent malicious sexist change. Can you read it again and conclude that this is a false charge given its longevity? For the sake of agreeing upon facts prior to opinion? ...I'm not saying anything about sexism. I just think it's a dumb rule. I agree with you that it may be tradition, so perhaps "Now" is not appropriate because it's no different than the past, but I think it's an outdated rule. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46419 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:25 Falling wrote: If you want a sense of decorum in the House and not want people to show up in beach wear or sweat pants, a line must be drawn somewhere. Where ever the line is, it may seem silly, but without the line you can be sure people are going to sink to the lowest common denominator. Apparently, they have things like 'ties of shame'. So it's not like they are after one gender on dress code. That's fair, although I don't think the reporter was trying to wear a bikini. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:30 Danglars wrote: Saying "now shoulders are taboo" in an article that says "women now need" and a post that says "apparently it is Paul Ryan's policy" implies recent malicious sexist change. Can you read it again and conclude that this is a false charge given its longevity? For the sake of agreeing upon facts prior to opinion? I don't think anybody is arguing this is a rule at this point, at least here. What I'm curious about is has this rule been violated before and just not acted upon? Or has everybody just known and put up with it or happened to coincidentally never run afoul of it. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11607 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: That's fair, although I don't think the reporter was trying to wear a bikini. No, but you draw the line way before that point. As to Mohdoo- I don't think anyone suffered, maybe embarrassed, but next time she'll remember to wear a sweater over top and it'll be all good. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:39 Falling wrote: No, but you draw the line way before that point. As to Mohdoo- I don't think anyone suffered, maybe embarrassed, but next time she'll remember to wear a sweater over top and it'll be all good. But I am asking what value the sweater would serve. How can the sweater be directly justified? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:30 Danglars wrote: Saying "now shoulders are taboo" in an article that says "women now need" and a post that says "apparently it is Paul Ryan's policy" implies recent malicious sexist change. Can you read it again and conclude that this is a false charge given its longevity? For the sake of agreeing upon facts prior to opinion? seems like fake news to me | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 08 2017 02:32 Mohdoo wrote: I'm being lazy, sorry. I was just chucking my thought of "that's some stupid shit" over the fence. I'm not saying Paul Ryan or republicans are seeking to harm women or something like that. All I am saying is that women should be allowed to display their shoulders at work. I suppose I find myself wondering what purpose it serves other than ceremony. Dress jackets are ridiculous in any context unless you are cold. It feels like being required to wear a kimono. It just doesn't serve a purpose. That dress code doesn’t sound any different that the dress code for attorneys at court, man or woman. Suits and business dresses. I’ve had to talk to some of our clients about how not to appear in court, since they seemed to think that a button up shirt with jeans and sneakers would be cool. | ||
| ||
