To say increased wealth doesn't come from exploitation because there's always been exploitation is fucking stupid.

In the 1800s people just became better at exploiting labourers. You could call that innovation, I guess.. if you are a callous bitch.

interesting, I agree this video needs context. Also the guy should have just cooperated with the officers and went outside - why unnecessarily provoke a situation like this when it could most likely be better resolved through cooperation?

I am however curious where the line is drawn with these sorts of calls and the laws allowing police to enter regardless of warrant. Obviously the police should have some authority to enter - many violent crimes take place inside homes, and they should have the authority to enter to prevent these crimes given reasonable suspicion - but where do we draw the line? I once was up late with some friends at our place, and we saw the police at a house next door. They saw we were up, came over, and asked us if we knew our neighbour (which we didn't) or had any information about whether or not he might have been inside because someone called in worried that the guy was going to kill himself. The police eventually left without breaking in the door. I think they were right in doing so in this situation.

but it's such a tough situation.. In the end, I think if there was a violent crime taking place against me in my home, which perhaps was called in by someone else who heard the noise, I would gladly forfeit my privacy and the cost of new hinges for my door for my own safety. I would want the police to enter, even if the perpetrator was yelling about police states and so forth... I would assume that most victims might also opt for this, which is why we allow police some discretion in these circumstances.

LOTR soap opera with lots of sex.

...I mean that in a good way.

Have to say, love the video, love the message that they are trying to get across that women have more options than the standard sexy-whatever on Halloween. Thanks for the vid.

But also this (while, parts of this anyway.. not sure if I buy the Mary Magdalene bit):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPPsf-Mi8FY

Women shouldn't criticize each others dress - this is divisive, not unifying. Also it just validates patriarchal notions of the chaste-loose binary and further sexualizes women's bodies. Revealing costumes are not always meant to be provocative, and even if they are, so what? Women should be free to express their sexuality without criticism from men or other women - anything else is repressive.

And I don't think the video is overtly trying to be critical of women who chose to dress "sexy", but I can't help but wonder if its underlying message is perhaps just that.

Overall I think it is a good video, showing women (perhaps young women in particular) that there are options beyond the types of costumes they may feel pressured into wearing. However, I think we also have to be careful not to fall into the same trap of categorizing women who chose to wear these costumes as shallow, sexually irresponsible, immoral or whatever other social meanings go into phrases like "keep your tits in".

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if the message is simply "make your own choices and don't let society pressure you into being sexually objectified" then cool. But let's not hate on the women who choose to express their sexuality in the process.

but yeah.. I do like the video, just had to add my small stipulation

Was hoping it might have been "Robot Frank" instead of "Robot and Frank" - Like this Robot Frank:

http://robot-frank.com/photos1.html

oh well..

upvote for the talent AND for a happy anniversary!

Well I have to say that I disagree with you regarding your stance on late term abortions. I don't believe it should be criminal (for either doctor or patient) to undertake a medical procedure which concerns your own health and well-being. The point of the removal of laws against abortion is to decriminalize, not to encourage late term abortions or make them commonplace. What good would criminalization do?

But regardless of this disagreement, I felt that your first comment describing Canada's lack of abortion legislation "right up until the last second before birth" largely simplifies a complex issue and undermines the regulations which exist to get women the proper care when they need it (early in their pregnancy). This is why I replied.. I didn't mean to provoke an argument.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> Criminal laws on/against abortion are a federal matter though. And Canada has for some time now very clearly established that there is NO LAW against abortions. Current Canadian federal law in ALL provinces and territories makes all abortion, even up to 9 months, perfectly and completely legal.

It's a little more complicated then this - rules and access vary provincially. In Alberta, for example, good luck finding a clinic which will preform an abortion past 20 weeks.

"Who Performs Late Term Abortions:

Hospitals and some clinics in Canada perform abortions on request up to about 20 weeks, and a
few centres do abortions up to 22 or 23 weeks. However, most of the very small number of
abortions performed over 20 weeks gestation in Canada are done to protect the woman’s physical
health, or because of serious fetal abnormalities. Such problems cannot be discovered until an
amniocentesis test is done on the fetus later in pregnancy. Rare abortions after 22 or 23 weeks
gestation are also done in Canada for some cases of lethal fetal abnormalities, where the fetus
cannot survive after birth.

Since abortion services after 20 weeks are not always readily accessible in all parts of Canada,
women are sometimes referred to clinics in the United States (Kansas, Washington State, and
Colorado). Such procedures and associated expenses may be funded in full or part by some
provincial governments."

http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/postionpapers/22-Late-term-Abortions.PDF

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^EMPIRE:
he mentions a woman possibly coming into the ER 7 months pregnant after having been raped. Is it even possible, legally, to get an abortion at such a late stage? At 7 months, that is pretty much a formed baby. I mean... there have been cases of premature babies with a lot less than 7 months of development.

In Canada it's legal right up until the very last second before birth. And heaven forbid anyone in our country discuss that might be too far, you'll be branded some woman hating neo-con trying to remove the rights of everyone who isn't a white male.

Ah! Yes!! I've been wanting to do this, but can't find anyone to go with

Next summer, I think.

Does anyone else feel bad for the snake?... It looks pretty uncomfortable to barf up a small mammal. Poor thing.

What is that in the sky? Don't know, must be aliens. = Why is that guy getting into his car? Don't know, must be going to kill his wife.

I would never pay that much for the Globe and Mail...

Or any other newspaper that doesn't come with a computer disk for displaying cool graphics! Yeesh..

This video has skewed the facts. When Tesla worked for Edison it was not as a "basic electrical engineer", his job was digging ditches for Edison outside his house: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gOR91oentQ

Obviously.

*Region blocked!