I tried to join a new gaming group last month. One of the guys at the table was just short of openly hostile to me. When confronted later, his justification for his behavior was ‘boobs at the table make me uncomfortable’.
This is my new dice bag:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-30/chivalry-on-sinking-ships-only-a-myth-researchers-find
“About 35 percent of male passengers survived, compared with about 18 percent of female passengers. Whether the ship sank slowly or quickly, women fared worse, according to documents describing the outcome of more than 15,000 people in shipwrecks.”
Well, so much for that example of ‘female privilege’.
Several methods of studying leadership exist. The trait approach emphasizes attributes such as personality, motives, values, and skills. A behavioral approach involves studying how managers cope with the demands and constraints of their job, as well as on identifying effective leadership behavior. Influence processes between leaders and others are examined by power-influence research, while contextual factors that influence leadership processes are studied by the situational approach. The integrative approach combines multiple leadership variables and thus can present the most accurate picture (Yukl, 2006).
It is rare for any leadership theory to include all leadership variables in the same study. Studies of leadership and social support are often done in isolation of each other. However, overlapping models imply that the differences between leadership and social support processes are not always clear (Suganuma & Ura, 2001). A person may seek leaders based on personality traits, but continue following a leader based on that leader’s effectiveness and ability to cope with the tasks at hand.
Situational variables other than leadership influence can affect the behavior of subordinates, yet the direct relationship between the leader’s style and the follower’s outcome also plays a role. An integrated leadership framework aligning the multiple leadership theories can provide more information about what entails effective leadership than simply studying one facet alone (Wan Khairuzzaman, Hussain, & Muhammad, 2011).
The integrative approach can demonstrate how the various factors combine to either create or destroy effective leadership. There is a story about blind men examining an elephant, each touching a different part of the animal and thus coming to wildly different and incorrect, conclusions about the whole creature. An integrative approach can help prevent such errors and allow a clear view of how effective leadership functions.
There is no one size fits all answer to ‘what makes a good leader’, in part because of the wealth of variety available in followers. A good leader for one situation and particular group of followers might be a complete failure when placed into a different role. Followers may claim someone is a good leader based on personality traits or influence levels, but a neutral, longer range view could show that no progress is being made due to poor management skills or perhaps the characteristics of the followers themselves.
Taking an integrative approach to leadership study provides more information on what kind of leader is appropriate for which situations in addition to what universal traits may be found in a good, effective leader. The other approaches serve a purpose in examining particular aspects of leadership, but it is combining them in the integrative approach that can truly give a bigger picture answer to the question ‘what makes a leader?’.
The state owes prostitutes and their families (I am thinking specifically of their children) an immediate escape from prostitution in terms of social services, housing, jobs and physical protection, and absolutely ferocious, aggressive prosecution of those who hurt them. It does not owe them a safe way to engage in selling sex because…to participate in prostitution when there is a real, meaningful exit is to willingly participate in the belief that men should be able to buy access to our bodies–and that is wrong. If you insist on doing that despite having real options, at some point you have to face the fact that you are choosing to be vulnerable to the violence and cruelty and degradation that are absolutely inherent in prostitution.
Yep, that’s someone saying if a person chooses to work in the sex trade, the law is not obligated to protect them and it’s their own damn fault for putting themselves in that position. Note – this person lumps all porn (all porn, not just gonzo, not just illegally produced, not even porn designed for male audiences, but ALL porn) in with prostitution.
And if you disagree with her, you either A) are getting off on the fact that there are women forced into prostitution/porn that are raped and tortured, or B) suffering from PTSD due to being a rape victim.
Here is a thread, Lee. Feel free to continue your mansplaining here.
Original Thread, where Crommunist also destroys you, is here, in case you forget.
The US constitution states:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
Why should a woman be forced into involuntary servitude to anyone, let alone a fetus? Is having sex now somehow a crime for which only women can be convicted?
on A place for Lee to Mansplain on A place for Lee to Mansplain on About
on About
on The Thirteenth Amendment
On Guns
I own guns. I use guns. I have a concealed carry permit and do sometimes carry concealed. I have actually drawn and fired my weapon in self defense and killed the target for which I was aiming with a single well-placed shot to the head. I do hunt, though for hunting I prefer to use a bow.
And it is my considered opinion that the vast majority of the US does not need to own guns. And nobody needs to own an automatic. Few need to own a semi-automatic. Nobody needs a high-powered rifle. Absolutely nobody needs a handgun that can penetrate the average front door of a house.
Guns should at be at least as inconvenient to own as cars. You must pass a test that shows you know how to use one before you are given the license that allows you to use one. Your license can be suspended at anytime should you operate one in a manner even remotely unsafe. You must be retested at set intervals to ensure you are still able to utilize one properly. You must register and pay taxes on all firearms you own. If you take your guns out of your gun safe, you must be able to show that you have paid insurance on said firearms should any ‘accidents’ occur. You must produce your license, gun registration, and proof of insurance upon request by any LEO when having said firearms outside your gun safe. Being in possession of a firearm while under the effects of any mind-altering substance will result in your ‘right’ to possess a firearm being revoked for a minimum of one year up to however long it takes you to grow the fuck up. Firing your gun in the air in public should be grounds for immediate revocation of your firearm license until you complete a firearm safety course which should cost you at least your average monthly available funds to take. Carrying your firearm in public without being able to demonstrate you were either on your way home, to a gun range, to go hunting, or other actually valid reason should net you a ticket of at least $200.
Yes, that sucks. Yes, it’s inconvenient. Yes, it’s annoying that75% of gun owners give the rest of us a bad name. But that’s life. Deal. Or figure out a way to fix the part of the human brain that makes them be chronic dumbshits.