SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Devuan, the once devil-may-care total fork of Debian, once linked to virulent internet sexism and gamer-gate affiliated image forums by Debian Developer Russel Coker, has mulled the option of enacting a Code of Conduct when one of its female members was insulted:
> https://botbot.me/freenode/devuan/2016-05-25/?page=2
>jaromil today i was scrolling through http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_...
>golinux Well, I tried but couldn't find anybody. Then nextime popped up
>jaromil jeez. we need to take precautions. and also I get the point from Sarah Mei we need a code of conduct on-line and later for on-site http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2015/02/01/the-fos...
> its never too early for that
>
>golinux One can only control one's own actions. ;)
>
>jaromil ah the wise one
...
>Wizzup he is doxed?
>jaromil that's him. we have a dossier yes
Devuan has been criticized for taking a "who gives a damn" and "real admins do it all by hand themselves every install" attitude towards security hardening scripts, and despise in particular any mention of the "bastille" linux hardening script (originally funded by Mandrake Linux).
Interestingly when Devuan was forming, the people behind Devuan cited the very person they are considering making the code of conduct against:
> http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20141027
>VUA: It will be a governing body that puts the benefits of the users first, not the mystification of a "doacracy" delivering all the power to the package maintainers.
>Originally, Debian was created as a universal operating system for the users. The Free Software movement itself is there to defend users' rights. Sgryphon explains it well in this thread. ( http://www.debianuserforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=63&t=3031 )
>We will likely reproduce the governing body of Debian to follow its original mandate, with the advantage of starting small and more focused, hopefully with less pressure from the interest of commercial developers.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 01 2016, @05:16PM
I don't know why you refuse to see that women are treated horribly (by design) and experience society differently as a result.
Because that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Women are (in the west) the political, social, and economic equals of men. There are some places in the world that still desperately need feminism, but not the USA.
Women even have some unique, unearned, privileges and protections carved out for for them such as preferential treatment in family and divorce courts, protection of bodily integrity, and a virtual monopoly on domestic violence resources despite making up nearly half of abusers themselves per the CDC (http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-victims-of-partner-abuse/)
(Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:28PM
You're suffering from our shit- doesn't-stink-syndrome, as well as those who've moderated you "informative".
Then you're deliberately ignoring the evidence all around you.
If you mean I can't take a small girl and chop off her clitoris, then yes protections exist. If you're speaking about the right of a woman over her own body, I suggest you expose yourself to the Republican party where a woman's body is subject to God's law, and by extension, the laws that Republicans pass.
A woman's bodily autonomy is not respected in the U.S., and assertions to the contrary are inane. At most you could say that women have some very hard fought for autonomy in certain places in the U.S, but only after all the red tape and bureaucracy designed to obfuscate and hamper their abilities to enjoy it. You only need to look at Texas with a single abortion clinic left about to close over regulatory burdens purely designed to close the facilities, not engender a woman's bodily autonomy. Texas doesn't give a shit about a woman's bodily autonomy. So even where women are allegedly protected by laws, there isn't a whole lot of respect for women. At least not ideologically, and only in a begrudging fashion, which is the only way to explain the Republican party's entire attitude towards women and minorities.
Hardly unique, I'm sure other countries have family courts. Likewise, it's hardly unearned either, as they never had to earn it. Family courts tend to side with the mothers as a cultural predilection towards child rearing (the man earns the money,the woman takes care of the children), not that the mother is automatically correct. That's hard to say it isn't earned, as tens of thousands of years of human existence has attested that women are fairly good at the raising of children. As somebody who's had experience with this (numerous friends and family), the courts do not provide unearned protections and privileges towards women. Often we can see the children placed with the father, even though the mother is actually best suited. You're just plain wrong about family courts, they are not unfairly sided towards women, and there are plenty of examples of both genders being treated unfairly at one point or another. That shouldn't surprise you since not all fathers and mothers are equally suited towards child rearing.
I highly doubt the numbers in whatever article you've provided, but as somebody with experience in outreach programs, you're full of shit. We don't have enough domestic violence resources as I'm having problems placing a lady right now. The reason why it is not as geared towards men? Men have all the money and power typically in these relationships, and where abused, have far greater abilities to leave and still provide for themselves. After all, if the paycheck follows them.....
It's rare to see a man abused that is forced to stay with his abuser in order to maintain a standard of living. In most cases the man chooses to stay over egotistical notions that they're the man and they should, instead of telling that bitch to pack up and leave (or the man packing up and leaving her). It's ridiculously common for women to not have a choice and the lady I was trying to help is back at home with her abuser precisely because of a dearth of domestic violence resources in my region. I just don't have, or have even heard of, a single male requesting help from the outreach program I assist with. That being said, I know we are set up to help him should he make the choice to seek it.
After all of that... we could speak about earnings. That is not equal, and there is more than enough statistics that show that women in comparable jobs earn less than male counterparts. You can complain all you want about it and try to explain it away, but at the end of the day women earn less for the same jobs and same work.
The U.S is not some shining beacon of gender equality, and in fact, we are kind of complete fuckups at equality in general.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2016, @03:13AM
If you mean I can't take a small girl and chop off her clitoris, then yes protections exist.
And if you perform an equivalent act on a male baby, you're just a doctor--or a religious Jew/Muslim. No protections for males; female privilege.
In most cases the man chooses to stay over egotistical notions that they're the man and they should
Wow, nice victim blaming, asshole. I know that shit wouldn't fly if I used the same argument against women and it would be just as true--which is to say, not true at all. So that's two double standards in your wall of mental diarrhea. I'm not going to bother with the rest of your misandry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 02 2016, @04:56AM
You should go study some anatomy before commenting on related matters.
(Score: 2) by http on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:38PM
You haven't been paying attention - it's not an extraordinary claim. You're ignoring the evidence the people in the thick of it are providing. Oh, and saveservices is/was run by a mail-order bride company... not exactly credible. If you actually read the report, it doesn't claim what they say it claims - one in a hundred woman slapping a man in the face doesn't compare with three men in a hundred decking a woman with one, two, three haymakers and don't you dare get back up.
So shut the fuck up, AC. Even if you're trying to claim that a scratch is the same as a hospital visit, and go read tables 4.1 and 4.2 which DOES make that simplification - page 38 of the report [cdc.gov], page 48 of the pdf. For women, lifetime physical violence 33%, 39 million; for men, 28%, 32 million.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 2, Informative) by http on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:41PM
Oh, and if case you don't feel like doing the work yourself to educate your sorry self, the same report (I know, reading hard) lists stats of 30.3% of women experiencing severe physical violence versus 13.8% of men in their lifetime.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 01 2016, @08:47PM
Men and women are abusers and victims at about equal rates, and in equal intensity. Sorry.