lauantaina, maaliskuuta 29, 2008

Yllätys!

Marja Tiura:
Kokoomuksen eduskuntaryhmän puheenjohtaja Marja Tiura pitää julkitullutta Kanervan tekstiviestiä yllättävänä.

- Minulla oli se käsitys, että tekstareissa on kyse työasioista. Pahalta siis näyttää.

10 kommenttia:

tikka kirjoitti...

http://www.iltasanomat.fi/uutiset/ulkomaat/uutinen.asp?id=1510410

niin, onneksi tasa-arvo huoltajuusasioissa paranee jo ruotsissa. suomihan yleensä seuraa perässä.

jorma kirjoitti...

"Minulla oli se käsitys, että tekstareissa on kyse työasioista."

Työasioista? Onko näillä uiveloilla joku oma maa, johon ulkoministeri Kanerva pitää yhteyttä?

Vortac kirjoitti...

Ai että sellanen käsitys kaiken tämän kohun jälkeen jollakin eukolla on ollu.. huh. Kylläpä on vapaata vuokratilaa naisten aivokammioissa yllin kyllin.

- Vortac

Anonyymi kirjoitti...

linkki
AUSTRALIASSA tehty tutkimus paljastaa, että kohtuullisesta masennuksesta kärsivät naiset harrastavat yli 30 prosenttia enemmän seksiä kuin iloluontoiset sisarensa. Monash Universityn selvityksen mukaan seksi antaa masennuksesta kärsiville naisille läheisyyden ja turvallisuuden tunnetta.

linkkiBRITTIMIEHISTÄ 52 prosenttia katsoo jo elävänsä naisten sääntöihin perustuvassa yhteiskunnassa. 63 prosenttia naisista myöntää, että miehet joutuvat kamppailemaan heihin kohdistettujen vaatimusten kuristusotteessa, mutta tästä ei äijille liiemmin sääliä tai sympatiaa herunut. Vain 33 prosenttia miehistä uskaltaa enää puhua naisten seurassa "asioista niiden oikeilla nimillä" ja kaksi kolmasosaa pitää parhaana salata todelliset mielipiteensä tai pitää kitansa täysin kiinni. Tutkimus perustui 2 000 britin haastatteluun.

Mikko Ellilä kirjoitti...

http://rachellucas.com/?p=632

Diamonds, schmiamonds.

Finally, the day I get to talk about how much I hate Valentine’s Day commercials, and all-year jewelry commercials.

He went to Jaaared! Great! You’re the proud new owner of an inherently worthless hunk of metal and rock. But it’s symbolic, right? It proves he loves you. You’re worth it.

Sorry, I don’t get it. And I don’t think it’s necessarily women who perpetuate the bullshit that they must have expensive jewelry. At the very least, women are not the whole problem.

Many years ago, I was dating a guy whose name was not Derek but that’s what I’m calling him. I liked Derek SO MUCH. He was smart, very cute, extremely funny, and I liked everything about his entire personality. Until the discussion about jewelry came up.

We’d been seriously dating for three months when one day he told me one of his friends had gotten engaged and had given the girl a $5,000 ring. This friend was a college student at the time, and so was the girl, both about age 24. The girl was apparently thrilled right out of her panties about this ring and cried and cried with joy when he gave it to her.

Obviously, I openly scoffed. I laughed derisively and said that was the stupidest thing I’d ever heard, a broke college student proposing with a $5,000 ring and another broke college student being happy about it.

As I went about my scoffing, Derek grew increasingly dismayed. I noticed this and asked him why he was staring at me with that frown. He said, “If I ever propose to you, it’s going to be with a much bigger ring than that.” We’d never talked about getting married; we weren’t that serious. He was being hypothetical and we both understood that. It was a theoretical argument but still. I asked him, “How much more?”

He said at least $10,000.

I said, “I would never accept that. No way.” Derek said that he didn’t mean tomorrow, he meant some day when he was making more money. I said I didn’t care, there were no circumstances in which I would ever in my life accept a gift that cost $10,000 and that just sits on your finger. It doesn’t keep you warm, feed you, entertain you, or bring you any comfort or use whatsoever.

Derek explained to me that that wasn’t the point, and that the purpose of such a ring was symbolic. He actually said with a straight face, “An expensive ring on my woman’s finger tells the world that I have money and that I love my woman.”

Horrified, I told him that I didn’t give a shit what the world thinks about how much a man loves me, and that it was the height of shallowness to care about what the world thinks about your wealth. This angered Derek and he demanded to know what I was trying to prove. “It’s okay for people to know you’re successful, there is nothing to be ashamed of.”

Jesus, Derek. Just Jeeesus.

We went around and around on this issue for days. Finally, when pressed, he admitted that no matter what I thought about it, if we ever got engaged, he was buying me a $10,000 ring and would expect me to wear it because it was that important to him to have that visual symbol of his wealth stuck on his woman. At least he was honest about it.

I found this concern with superficial bullshit a complete dealbreaker, and broke up with him. We stayed in touch, and sure enough, within a couple of years he found his very own princess, bought her a $15,000 ring, married her, and knocked her up within a year. She stays at home with the kid now. He cheats on her regularly. But she wears that ring to parties, dammit, and people know how much money Derek has and how much he loves his wife.

So it’s not just women, is what I’m saying. There are plenty of men like Derek.

But I’m not about to give the chicks a free pass. Ah nah. I have been paying very close attention to the sisterhood my whole life, and this is what I have witnessed.

Had a coworker named Lucy when I was about 20; we were the entire staff of a very slow doctor’s office and thus spent all our time immersed in girl talk. Lucy was engaged to Paul and they were both college seniors. She came from Houston, with money, and every day for months she gave me the latest about her wedding, which ended up costing $70,000. She had a ring on her finger that had cost Paul the equivalent of five months’ salary, and when I asked her what the hell, she said, “He’ll have it paid off within three years! That’s nothing when you’re talking about me being happy with my engagement ring for the rest of my life. It’s the most important thing I’ll ever own!”

Poor Paul. Nah, screw Paul. He should have realized he was marrying a moron. I’m sure he found out how happy his money could make her when they got divorced.

Had another coworker named Lisa when I was about 25. She was dating Mark for three years when he bought her a Valentine’s Day gift that was a diamond tennis bracelet. She told me one morning, all giggly and embarrassed, that the night he gave it to her, she was so moved with delight that she gave him the first, uh, what rhymes with joe blob, of their relationship. And then she said, “I hope he didn’t get used to it ‘cuz that’s only happening whenever he gives me jewelry.” Spoken like a true hooker.

There’s nothing wrong with one adult buying a nice present for another adult if it makes them both happy. My ex, John, bought me some small but high-quality pieces of jewelry that I knew were well within his budget, just because he wanted to; he thought they’d look pretty on me. (I gave all but one piece of it back to him when we split up; he traded them in for a nice watch.)

But I really don’t get the obsession with it. Have people not seen “Blood Diamond”? Sheesh. And why would you rather spend thousands of bucks on something that goes around your wrist/neck/finger instead of something you can actually use for something other than impressing people? I think it’s silly. Your mileage may vary.

Anonyymi kirjoitti...

"Ai että sellanen käsitys kaiken tämän kohun jälkeen jollakin eukolla on ollu.. huh. Kylläpä on vapaata vuokratilaa naisten aivokammioissa yllin kyllin."

Yleistätkö tällaisen kommentin koskemaan koko naiskunnan älynlahjoja?

Jaaha kirjoitti...

Olen kyllä Kokoomuksen johtoon vähän helvetin pettynyt. Tuollaista hyvä veli -mentaliteettia nimenomaan ei nykypäivänä kaivata. Ike menetti viimeisenkin rippeen uskottavuudestaan jo viikkoja sitten, eikä tässä pitäisi olla enää mitään epäselvää. Oli sitten yksityisiä viestejä tai ei. Surullinen farssi.

Katainen on ilmeisesti heikko johtaja.

petteri perämutteri kirjoitti...

http://www.nykypaiva.fi/default.asp?sa=93362

jorma kirjoitti...

Aika paljastava juttu tuo Nykypäivän artikkeli. Tasa-arvovaltuutettu mm. väitti kesän 2006 jalkapallon MM-kisojen alla, että ihmiskappa ja pakkoprostituutio olisivat merkittävä ongelma Saksassa kisojen aikaan. Todellisuus olikin sitten ihan jotain muuta kuin nämä täysin tuulesta temmatut kauhutarinat, joita Suomenkin media täysin kritiikittömästi toisteli.

"Kisojen jälkeen kohu haihtui. Puoli vuotta myöhemmin brittitoimittaja Bruno Waterfield vaati EU:ta julkaisemaan sen keräämät raportit MM-kisojen lieveilmiöistä.
Raporteissa todetaan, että ”mitään merkkiä tai minkäänlaisia todisteita väitetyistä 40 000 seksiorjasta ei löytynyt”.
Myös Saksan poliisin mukaan ”mitään havaintoja kisojen aikana lisääntyneestä prostituutiosta ei tehty”."

Koska nämä valehtelijat saatetaan edesvastuuseen lausunnoistaan?

Vortac kirjoitti...

Jorma kyseli: Koska nämä valehtelijat saatetaan edesvastuuseen lausunnoistaan?

Kun KARMA iskee!

- Vortac