OceanView
Mar 17, 09:40 AM
75-100 long at Brea. Not looking good at the moment.
leekohler
Mar 10, 05:31 PM
I have stayed out of this one for a while, but now he has gone from "sick" to "awesome" with this video on Funny or Die.
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
I don't even know what to say...
zap2
Jul 24, 11:16 AM
50%? Did you forget how much Macs cost? One of the main reasons Dell has such a huge market share is because they are so cost effective and come with great bundles aimed at the average person. 50% of computer users could never afford a Mac.
If Apple can come up with bundles that include a monitor, printer, and scanner while still managing to be priced competitively with Dell then theyd have a chance at Dell level marketshare. Bundling iPods with Macs could be a great program for Apple as well. But they are very far away from offering anything close to what Dell does for that price, and thats what the average person wants (I doubt they are the least bit concerned with Windows, they just want a computer with everything they need).
Apple offers the programs people want, but theyre useless without the hardware to use the programs. They should do more to make it easier for non-computer people to get everything they need at a decent price (unlike shopping through dell.com which gets you good deals on a lot of stuff, shopping through Apple seems to cost more than if you bought the crap seperately)
Many people who buy PC buy pricy ones.. were they could buy a Mac for the price of the Dell/HP/ect
That said i doubt Apple will have 50% of the market in the next few years simply becase that would mean Mac sales would need to up but a ton AND PC sales would be to pretty much stop. Also that would be more then any hardwre maker currently has... look for 10% in the next few years
If Apple can come up with bundles that include a monitor, printer, and scanner while still managing to be priced competitively with Dell then theyd have a chance at Dell level marketshare. Bundling iPods with Macs could be a great program for Apple as well. But they are very far away from offering anything close to what Dell does for that price, and thats what the average person wants (I doubt they are the least bit concerned with Windows, they just want a computer with everything they need).
Apple offers the programs people want, but theyre useless without the hardware to use the programs. They should do more to make it easier for non-computer people to get everything they need at a decent price (unlike shopping through dell.com which gets you good deals on a lot of stuff, shopping through Apple seems to cost more than if you bought the crap seperately)
Many people who buy PC buy pricy ones.. were they could buy a Mac for the price of the Dell/HP/ect
That said i doubt Apple will have 50% of the market in the next few years simply becase that would mean Mac sales would need to up but a ton AND PC sales would be to pretty much stop. Also that would be more then any hardwre maker currently has... look for 10% in the next few years
simonsimon
May 3, 08:10 AM
And yet prices in the Australian Apple Store are still 25% higher than the USA Store. How rude, Apple.
Top end 27" iMac = US$1999, or in the Australian Store, AUD$2299 which at the current exchange rate is about US$2500. Why should we pay more, Apple? If anything, we're closer to China so should pay less on shipping!
Whilst it's slightly better than yesterdays prices, I'm still seriously not happy.
I'd buy one if we got the USA prices.
Top end 27" iMac = US$1999, or in the Australian Store, AUD$2299 which at the current exchange rate is about US$2500. Why should we pay more, Apple? If anything, we're closer to China so should pay less on shipping!
Whilst it's slightly better than yesterdays prices, I'm still seriously not happy.
I'd buy one if we got the USA prices.
more...
mdntcallr
Oct 23, 10:21 AM
this is just microsofts way to stick it to the mac user who wants to use dual booting. not those who will use boot camp?
anyway you look at it, this is lame. Can't we just pay them and they accept our money? Now they will tell us it isn't enough, we have to pay more.
screw ms, people can't get a break FROM THESE LOSERS~!!
anyway you look at it, this is lame. Can't we just pay them and they accept our money? Now they will tell us it isn't enough, we have to pay more.
screw ms, people can't get a break FROM THESE LOSERS~!!
Sodner
Apr 12, 09:22 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
more...
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 11, 10:54 AM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
yetanotherdave
Sep 13, 09:10 PM
http://valemail.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/petrol-price.jpg
I wish it was still that cheap!
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51HByy5BMKL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
Keith Malley - Can you imagine stand up (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041ZUB1I?ie=UTF8&child=B0041ZUC2G)
I wish it was still that cheap!
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51HByy5BMKL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
Keith Malley - Can you imagine stand up (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0041ZUB1I?ie=UTF8&child=B0041ZUC2G)
more...
kallisti
Apr 9, 06:23 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5064/5602375649_c5c0d36f4c_b.jpg
Old print I just rediscovered. Forgive the dust--it seems to have become a permanent part of the only print I have. Negatives lost in a prior move.
Left half of the shot is from a kitchen window. The right half is the reflection on the fridge.
Old print I just rediscovered. Forgive the dust--it seems to have become a permanent part of the only print I have. Negatives lost in a prior move.
Left half of the shot is from a kitchen window. The right half is the reflection on the fridge.
samcraig
Apr 30, 08:24 AM
What doesn't Amazon sell? toilet paper, tampons, tooth paste, and it is worth 80 billion, when it should be worth 1 billion. It is an uninspired discounter, like online-Walmart.
On Amazon you can buy used comic books, used read softcover novels, used 10 year old PaperMate pens, it is like a giant flea market.
They need sales and prestige to keep up their scam.
High valuations should belong to high tech companies. Amazon says the Kindle is their heart, when it represents less than 0.1% of its sales.
On Amazon they sell fertilizer made from dung.
Apple is instead a high tech company. It makes money by selling high advanced technology.
Unlike Amazon, which has no research and development budget (how much research do you need to carry Q-tips and tampons?), Apple is not a scam. It is what it says it ism a high tech edge company. Amazon says the same, but it is sad flea market selling dirty used bird feeders.
This post is wrong on so many levels - it's not even worth addressing its points other than to say it's wrong. Especially the notion that Amazon has no research and development budget. Yeah. OK.
On Amazon you can buy used comic books, used read softcover novels, used 10 year old PaperMate pens, it is like a giant flea market.
They need sales and prestige to keep up their scam.
High valuations should belong to high tech companies. Amazon says the Kindle is their heart, when it represents less than 0.1% of its sales.
On Amazon they sell fertilizer made from dung.
Apple is instead a high tech company. It makes money by selling high advanced technology.
Unlike Amazon, which has no research and development budget (how much research do you need to carry Q-tips and tampons?), Apple is not a scam. It is what it says it ism a high tech edge company. Amazon says the same, but it is sad flea market selling dirty used bird feeders.
This post is wrong on so many levels - it's not even worth addressing its points other than to say it's wrong. Especially the notion that Amazon has no research and development budget. Yeah. OK.
more...
blahblah100
Apr 29, 02:56 PM
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
How so? Why would there need to be some explaining, if this was the case?
How so? Why would there need to be some explaining, if this was the case?
YoNeX
Nov 3, 01:21 PM
A lot of the features are missing right now, the preference window only has 2 checkboxes. Just ran into a really nasty bug right now, still buggy.
There are no settings for VRam, seperate parition/drive, or even shared folders. This is defitantely not like the PC version (right now). But since its beta, more features will probably be added soon.
There are no settings for VRam, seperate parition/drive, or even shared folders. This is defitantely not like the PC version (right now). But since its beta, more features will probably be added soon.
more...
goosnarrggh
Dec 5, 12:48 PM
Furthermore, one of the MOKB flaws is just a bug and is not actually a security vulnerability. The dmg vulnerability, wherein a malformed disk image can crash OS X and during this inject uknown code, has been debunked according to this guy (http://alastairs-place.net/2006/11/dmg-vulnerability/).
Indeed on first read, I'd say that he presents a convincing argument. I'll go along with his diagnosis that there's no hole that could open you up to arbitrary code execution. If that's your definition of a security hole, then it follows that there's no security hole there. But it's still leaving you open the possibility that the operating system may crash for no apparent reason, causing you to lose any unsaved work.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
Indeed on first read, I'd say that he presents a convincing argument. I'll go along with his diagnosis that there's no hole that could open you up to arbitrary code execution. If that's your definition of a security hole, then it follows that there's no security hole there. But it's still leaving you open the possibility that the operating system may crash for no apparent reason, causing you to lose any unsaved work.
Lost work... Depending on how productive you are, that can easily result in monetary damage being done.
As I posted previously, that leaves you in no worse a situation than you always are if you're running a desktop computer without a UPS. But I think that it still warrants attention.
At best it still qualifies as an inconvenience, because the savvy user who saves her work regularly will only have lost 5 or 6 minutes of productivity including the reboot. At worst, it can result in hours of lost work for the user who doesn't understand the "save your work" mantra -- especially if we're talking about somebody who's protected by a battery backup and doesn't think that unexpected reboots should be possible on such an inherently stable operating system.
And it's undoubtedly a bug inside Apple's software that's causing this problem, therefore it is absolutely appropriate that Apple should be expected to fix it. I appreciate anybody's effort to bring such bugs to light, because that increases the probability that Apple will find out about it and fix it.
Epic Xbox Revie
Apr 22, 10:17 AM
Disappointing if this is true. I really wanted 4G on my next Verizon iPhone :(
more...
notjustjay
Apr 26, 12:42 PM
Oh look smart remarks without substance must be a fanboy. :p
It's not a smart remark, it's truth. You can stream your own media to yourself with a DIY solution but it will cost you for (a) the hard drives which are storing your media, (b) the upload bandwidth consumed by your home server, (c) the hydro costs of keeping your server running 24/7, and (d) the time it takes for any setup and maintenance.
Obviously many people have no problem paying these "costs" and would prefer them over a hard cash outlay (even $20/year), but that doesn't mean these costs don't exist and shouldn't be factored into the value proposition.
It's not a smart remark, it's truth. You can stream your own media to yourself with a DIY solution but it will cost you for (a) the hard drives which are storing your media, (b) the upload bandwidth consumed by your home server, (c) the hydro costs of keeping your server running 24/7, and (d) the time it takes for any setup and maintenance.
Obviously many people have no problem paying these "costs" and would prefer them over a hard cash outlay (even $20/year), but that doesn't mean these costs don't exist and shouldn't be factored into the value proposition.
Eudall
May 2, 06:07 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I am a little surprised that there have been no leaked photos or specs or anything (thinking back to the MBP refresh).
I really hope the release is tomorrow though, 5 months without a home computer (I'm a software engineer too!) has killed me.
I am a little surprised that there have been no leaked photos or specs or anything (thinking back to the MBP refresh).
I really hope the release is tomorrow though, 5 months without a home computer (I'm a software engineer too!) has killed me.
more...
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 28, 04:03 PM
Ok.......?
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
parapup
Apr 26, 12:15 PM
Amazon is poised to pwn both Apple and Google on that one.
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
GekkePrutser
Apr 18, 04:32 AM
Any have a guess guess what this might mean for the 11"? Will that have to be even more of a compromise? I'm worried the C2D/320M might be a better option for me if Apple go for Sandy Bridge and have to cut even more corners on the 11" due to even harsher space/energy drain constraints.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
Corey Grandy
Sep 13, 09:43 AM
D'awww. What kind? Looks like our 100+ pound Great Pyrenees did when she was a puppy...she's slightly larger now :p
He's a Toy Eskimo :)
I love the little guy.
He'll grow to be about a foot off the ground and 12 lbs., if he's "Lucky"
He's a Toy Eskimo :)
I love the little guy.
He'll grow to be about a foot off the ground and 12 lbs., if he's "Lucky"
Reach9
Apr 18, 10:12 PM
Are you guys for real?
I'm not really into apple or apple products, but there is no big mystery behind the string ix.Mac.MarketingName (except for 'Mac', that is)
'ix' is and object or a variable in whatever programming language they've written this in.
'Mac' and 'MarketingName' are either methods or keys (in a hash) belonging to the 'ix' variable/object.
Let me illustrate with a simple javascript/JSON variable:
var ix = {
I'm not really into apple or apple products, but there is no big mystery behind the string ix.Mac.MarketingName (except for 'Mac', that is)
'ix' is and object or a variable in whatever programming language they've written this in.
'Mac' and 'MarketingName' are either methods or keys (in a hash) belonging to the 'ix' variable/object.
Let me illustrate with a simple javascript/JSON variable:
var ix = {
nies
Apr 26, 05:24 PM
Eldiablojoe, from what I understand appleguy123 and Chrmjenkins are both ok, plutonious was the only one lynched
Mord
Apr 25, 03:15 AM
While no one deserving to be rape or rob no matter what they are doing/ wearing and the person who did said things should be punished to the full extent of the law it does not remove a factor that some people do a very poor job and managing their risk profil.
We can not control how others will act but we can control our risk profile and our behavior.
Examples of managing our risk profile is saying out of bad parts of town if possible and avoid it at night. Girls avoiding wearing clothing that gets them to be a target and travel in well lite places and have a male escort.
It is about managing the risk profile. Now if someone gets raped I am not going to blame the victim but people should try to avoid being an easy target because even though legally and morally you are complete in the write still does not remove the fact that you have to live with the results of what was done to you.
Think about this. Lets say you get in an auto accident and T-Bone some dumb ass who ran a red light and nothing you could really do to avoid it and sad dumb ass is killed. Even though you could not do anything to avoid it you still have to live with that guilt that you killed another human being and many people that is really hard on them even though there was nothing they could of done to avoid it.
You're well meaning Rodimus so I'll tone down my response. Do you not think it's a little misogynistic to suggest women stay under the protection of a man? I also don't think that clothing even makes all that much difference as a rapist would typically forcibly remove it anyway. I've been the victim of a few sexual assaults in the past and I wasn't dressed particularly noteworthily at the time. Though every time I go out clubbing I don't really wear much at all, yet have never had trouble walking back through leeds at 5AM.
If I wished to take every precaution against such things happening again it would utterly devastate my social life, where do you draw the line? Personally I'd rater be an occasional victim of unwanted attention than a constant victim of my own fear.
I do though take your point, but only upon the condition that victim blaming is utterly unacceptable in any form and that encouraging people take such precautions should never ever mean that we should stop every effort to bring such people to justice and make every effort to stop these things from happening.
I would beat the hell out of any dude that was in the same bathroom as my daughter.
I'm curious as to what exactly you think any such person would do exactly? You ignoring your obvious prejudice here on a pragmatic level where on earth is the harm? They'll see your daughter wash her hands? Maybe touch up some makeup?
If someone was set on molesting your daughter they'd do it, they wouldn't dress up as a woman to make their way into the female toilets to do so, they'd just do it. Besides, do you like beating up cleaners? Plenty of female loos have male attendees.
If you don't have a daughter, then you don't have a clue.
I have seen some transgenders, and I have nothing to say to them.
So, you've seen some people who fall under the very broad category of "transgender", a category that includes various people who dress as female who don't and quite rightly don't use the female loos and thus you feel entitled to judge them all out of hand, and you're not going to admit that this is anything but prejudiced bigotry. Because you've "seen some"
I'd bet you've also seen and talked to a couple too just without knowing it. I know I have over the years only to find out later on. One of the great PR issues for transgender people is that whenever they start to blend with regular society they become invisible, though I guess with people like you around it's more of a blessing than an issue.
the fact is nobody knows the facts ... it could have been a Man trying to disguise himself as a Woman to gain access to the Woman's washroom.
maybe he was not a transgender and was a threat to young girls in the bathroom.
I don't think anybody has all the facts ... he was hardly beaten to the point where this thread is labeled "almost killed"
Not that I accept that surgery even matters but how do you expect to tell exactly? A mandatory full body scanner before entering? I'm going to refer you to my earlier question, where's the harm?
Why on earth would a potential rapist bother "disguising" himself as a woman? I challenge you to cite a single case where this has actually occurred.
If he still has "parts" down there ... he belongs in the Men's washroom
Her parts are none of your business, or anyone's really.
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
Ignoring the fact that she by her own omission has finished with it, even if she had not she would not be a crossdresser. There's more to sex and gender than an inny or an outy.
We can not control how others will act but we can control our risk profile and our behavior.
Examples of managing our risk profile is saying out of bad parts of town if possible and avoid it at night. Girls avoiding wearing clothing that gets them to be a target and travel in well lite places and have a male escort.
It is about managing the risk profile. Now if someone gets raped I am not going to blame the victim but people should try to avoid being an easy target because even though legally and morally you are complete in the write still does not remove the fact that you have to live with the results of what was done to you.
Think about this. Lets say you get in an auto accident and T-Bone some dumb ass who ran a red light and nothing you could really do to avoid it and sad dumb ass is killed. Even though you could not do anything to avoid it you still have to live with that guilt that you killed another human being and many people that is really hard on them even though there was nothing they could of done to avoid it.
You're well meaning Rodimus so I'll tone down my response. Do you not think it's a little misogynistic to suggest women stay under the protection of a man? I also don't think that clothing even makes all that much difference as a rapist would typically forcibly remove it anyway. I've been the victim of a few sexual assaults in the past and I wasn't dressed particularly noteworthily at the time. Though every time I go out clubbing I don't really wear much at all, yet have never had trouble walking back through leeds at 5AM.
If I wished to take every precaution against such things happening again it would utterly devastate my social life, where do you draw the line? Personally I'd rater be an occasional victim of unwanted attention than a constant victim of my own fear.
I do though take your point, but only upon the condition that victim blaming is utterly unacceptable in any form and that encouraging people take such precautions should never ever mean that we should stop every effort to bring such people to justice and make every effort to stop these things from happening.
I would beat the hell out of any dude that was in the same bathroom as my daughter.
I'm curious as to what exactly you think any such person would do exactly? You ignoring your obvious prejudice here on a pragmatic level where on earth is the harm? They'll see your daughter wash her hands? Maybe touch up some makeup?
If someone was set on molesting your daughter they'd do it, they wouldn't dress up as a woman to make their way into the female toilets to do so, they'd just do it. Besides, do you like beating up cleaners? Plenty of female loos have male attendees.
If you don't have a daughter, then you don't have a clue.
I have seen some transgenders, and I have nothing to say to them.
So, you've seen some people who fall under the very broad category of "transgender", a category that includes various people who dress as female who don't and quite rightly don't use the female loos and thus you feel entitled to judge them all out of hand, and you're not going to admit that this is anything but prejudiced bigotry. Because you've "seen some"
I'd bet you've also seen and talked to a couple too just without knowing it. I know I have over the years only to find out later on. One of the great PR issues for transgender people is that whenever they start to blend with regular society they become invisible, though I guess with people like you around it's more of a blessing than an issue.
the fact is nobody knows the facts ... it could have been a Man trying to disguise himself as a Woman to gain access to the Woman's washroom.
maybe he was not a transgender and was a threat to young girls in the bathroom.
I don't think anybody has all the facts ... he was hardly beaten to the point where this thread is labeled "almost killed"
Not that I accept that surgery even matters but how do you expect to tell exactly? A mandatory full body scanner before entering? I'm going to refer you to my earlier question, where's the harm?
Why on earth would a potential rapist bother "disguising" himself as a woman? I challenge you to cite a single case where this has actually occurred.
If he still has "parts" down there ... he belongs in the Men's washroom
Her parts are none of your business, or anyone's really.
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
Ignoring the fact that she by her own omission has finished with it, even if she had not she would not be a crossdresser. There's more to sex and gender than an inny or an outy.
bmwhd
May 4, 08:58 AM
This is actually consistent with what I'm hearing too. Fall release, combined GSM/CDMA platform.
