Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Baptist School and Christian Contestant
Oh yeah...I remember those Vanessa pictures. Very well. I was just trying to make a point, but I understand that had these photos been the same, she might've gotten the boot. And I agree regarding the school as well. To me, if a school has rules, whether that means wearing a uniform, not listening to rock n roll, or whatever else...you follow it or you don't go to the school.— May 13, 2009 7:47 p.m.
Paying Housewives
Regarding blues comments, I do think the word dishonest applies. obtuse - yes. But I don't agree with the "lack of morals". Regarding ego, I'm not sure. Because refried, at this point...you should be able to easily state: women being paid less than men is not a problem that needs addressing. Believe me, I felt the same way you did. Because I'd read the story in the paper ever year or so, and I just believed it. It wasn't until someone told me why the stats were that way, and how it's completely BS. They then asked me why a woman wouldn't asked to be paid more, and I had no answer. Within half an hour of that debate, I agreed with him. But I found so many people didn't hold that position. People that have opinions I generally respect (like a childhood friend that's a professor, my stepdad, etc). So I started asking (this was 15 years ago), every woman I knew, or would meet. None of them have ever been underpaid in the work place. A few of them had the opposite thing, though. They told me they were able to get away with stuff they wouldn't have if they were men (leaving work at lunch because of a bad break-up, etc). But again, I think that each situation is different. I'm not so sure the woman that told me that, doesn't realize that maybe her male boss would've given the same break to a guy that was going thru a nasty divorce. And, after asking countless people, and from my experiences in the work force, I just saw that this wasn't the case. And, nothing wrong with admitting your initial position was wrong. Colin Powel did it. Many people do. And, I think your heart is in the right place. You don't want women being underpaid. The problem is...when you find out that they really aren't (as you admitted to in the medical fields and government sector), it's not hard to own up to the rest of it. But like I said...if you have friends that have experienced this, I'd like to hear their stories. Or, I'd like to know of the businesses in the private sector that do pay women less. I'll do a story about it and expose them.— May 13, 2009 4:13 p.m.
Baptist School and Christian Contestant
Update: Regarding the Miss California ruling, Shana Moakler (sp?) just resigned (she's the one that was married to the dude in blink 182).— May 13, 2009 3:43 p.m.
Liar Liar Pants on Fire
I don't think O.J. convinced a lot of folks he was really innocent. I think a lot of African-Americans were going to be on his side (whether he was guilty or not), because with a lot of them, it became the big, bad police against "one of their own". It's logic that really blows me away. Because, every murderer or criminal uses "lies" and they convince no one. And O.Js BS was so obvious. But, as Christopher Darden said in his book, they ahd so much against O.J. that instead of excusing the black jurors like they had been, they decided to let black jurors on the case, because they'd still see all the evidence and find him guilty. It was his worst mistake of the trial (including him letting OJ try on the gloves). It's similar logic that women use in the debate going on right now in the thread about "paying housewives." Instead of people looking at a situation and analyzing it, they pick which ever side they think helps them the most. If they are a woman, then women must be making less than men for doing the "same job". If it's an African-American accused of a crime, and the cops are white, guess which sides everyone chooses?— May 13, 2009 9:38 a.m.
Paying Housewives
Okay refried, we'll agree women make less than men. But, I can't say it's for doing the "same job" as they stats prove they compile them without always looking at exactly what the job is. But, we can also agree that...in at least 95% of these cases, it's the womans fault ("fault" for lack of a better word). That either means they didn't ask for a raise where the men did. They didn't ask for as high of a starting salary, they didn't want to work the overtime the guy did, or they didn't want to have a 45 minute commute to work, or whatever). I would guess it's only 5% of men having a gender bias....so the stats all, basically, become meaningless. This now becomes something that IS NOT a problem. Because, just as Mr. Salary said...when the woman working with him found out he made $3,000 a year more (because he asked for it during the hiring process)...she asked for that, and got it. Every woman has that same opportunity.— May 13, 2009 9:34 a.m.
Paying Housewives
refried, read this link: http://blogs.payscale.com/ask_dr_salary/2007/04/m…— May 12, 2009 7:23 p.m.
Paying Housewives
Well, women being "safe" drivers...I don't think you realize that defensive isn't always good. Just watch women try to merge with traffic. It's a scary thing, them wanting to be "safe" instead of speeding up and just jumping into the lane as you're supposed to. Your sewing example just proved a very important point. If anyone (man or woman) isn't happy with their wage, they can leave. I don't go to Wal-Mart, as I don't approve of a lot of their practices. But ya know what? It's hard for me to have sympathy for their employees not getting health benefits or anything else, as the same logic applies. If you aren't happy with it, you don't have to work there. And, if the argument is "They might not be qualified for any other job," my point becomes "Get qualified, or tough s***!"— May 12, 2009 5:20 p.m.
Mike Tyson and Other Documentaries
I don't think you can say every documentary does that. Sure, every documentary has an agenda, maybe. But, I'll take a few points from Moore. His edits of the applause at the gun rally thing after Columbine. It made it look like they were applauding for one thing that was said, when they weren't. Him showing Bush talking so glib and carefree about terrorists, before saying "Now watch this shot" and hitting a golf ball. This segment was before 9/11, yet it makes it look like it was after, and he didn't care at all about the 9/11 victims...to be on a golf course and talking so cavalierly about the subject. Then, there's some politicians that got ambushed by him with a question about whether or not they'd sign a thing sending their kids to war (which is the stupidest argument anti-war people can say). They show one politician stop in his tracks, with his jaw dropped, before editing to the next one. This politician said what wasn't shown was him saying "I have a relative there. My nephew is going next week. I'd gladly sign this, and take these forms inside for you" (as per what Moore asked). Yet, he left that all out. Again, I wouldn't have a problem with THAT, just leave out the entire thing with that one politician, instead of the surprised look on his face, when it's taken out of context. Anyone would have a surprised look on their face if Michael Moores fat head shows up when you aren't expecting it.— May 12, 2009 5:16 p.m.
The Movie Blog
refried...find the movie Shower. I guarantee you'll love it, or I'll give you the money back you spent to buy it. Seriously. Never read Into the Wild, but part of my problem was the main character. I thought he was a bit of a prick and hard to truely like. I also thought the movie needed about 20 minutes shaved off (for example, the scene of him taking a shower in slow motion; not sure what Penn wanted to convey with that, but it was annoying and added nothing). My girlfriend loved this film, though. We both agreed the soundtrack was great, no matter how annoying Eddie Vedder is to both of us, he added tremendously do this film.— May 12, 2009 3:37 p.m.
Paying Housewives
refried...I have a number of questions for you. First, as was brought up earlier -- why doesn't a business open and hire all women? They can pay them significantly less, and make a huge profit. Now...why do you think that logic wouldn't work? Second, if you bought a company that had two accountants. One was a male, making $70,000 a year. The other was a female, making $60,000. You look into it, and both are great employees, have both been there the same length of time. And, your business pulls in close to a million a year in profits. What do you do in this situation? Third, here is the problem with all your stats. I think (wait..scratch that), I know that men are better drivers than women. Yet, I know for a fact that women get less tickets and are involved in less accidents. Now, do I need to explain why those stats are that way? I don't think I do, but I hardly think it shows which gender is the better driver. And lastly...I think women have it tougher in the work place. They have sexual harassment (even mild forms that you wouldn't be able to complain about). I think when a woman boss is mean, she can be labeled a "bitch" where a man doesn't get that label if he's tough. And there are lots of other reasons. I just think, in this day and age, it's silly to think women make less. I've yet to speak to a woman that has had that experience.— May 12, 2009 3:32 p.m.