search results matching tag: mother nature

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (48)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (9)     Comments (114)   

Mother Nature Says No To Yoga Exercise Video

Huge wave breaks window at restaurant on pier

Snow that doesn't melt! Is it a government conspiracy? (No.)

Overpopulation is a myth: Food, there's lots of it

Dumdeedum says...

This is a problem mother nature will deal with. Of course she's a bit of a psycho so it's gonna be double helpings of pestilence, famine and war for everyone. Certainly better than forward planning, eh!

Mosquito Mouthparts Find a Blood Vessel

What Bears Do in the Woods

Female Breadwinners = End of Society

JustSaying says...

A few questions...
ANYBODY who doesn't give 110% to their career will not reach the highest levels of that career?
Are you saying that Georgew W. gave 110% to become President? Well, if that what he delivered is what it takes to get the job, it's a shame I can't run for office. I wouldn't even have to put on pants to come across as less idiotic as he did.
Are you really buying into this "Just give everything and you'll get there" myth? 'Cause that's not how the real world works for everyone. Have you ever been denied a deserved promotion? That is not that uncommon, especially for women. Look, giving your best is usually necessary but not always required. Luck, a lack of scruple, intolerance of others, manipulative skills and connections can really propel your career even if you don't work hard enough to deserve it. Just think of the cliché of the woman who sleeps her way on top. She doesn't even have to give 110% there, men are easy to please.

And regarding you biological theories, yes, men are stronger but how strong do you have to be to sit in an office? How much strength does it take to type on a keyboard? I'd say the jobs these female breadwinners we're talking about have are usually not involving tasks of great physical strength.
And why is it automatically the women job to take care of the children?
I mean, we're talking 2 parent families here since single women have no other choice than going to work unless you want to suggest poverty or child labour as viable alternatives.
In todays first world society it shouldn't be such a stretch to consider men as caregivers of the family's offspring. What makes the stronger sex so unsuitable to play that part? Because we're emotional cripples, unable to bond with the little ones like people with real breasts? Because society could point at us and laugh about our mangina? What is it a woman does a man can't do?
Oh I get it, that's just how biology wants it, right? We have to listen to mother nature, it's the smart thing to do. Well, that's at least what I told the cops after I left my house naked. You know, pants don't grow on trees and shirts don't run through the woods, evading capture by predators. It's not natural, not what mother wants. Let's not do this. Right?
We decided to shape the world as we see fit a long time ago. We can't change all behavioural routines in our heads but we are not powerless either. Why stick to role models that are ancient when we can make new ones with more benefits? Humans can't fly; didn't stop them from building planes. This is a question of nurture not nature.

What troubles me the the most, though, is your apparent belief that households with both parents working do it by choice. That is certainly not always the case, especially not in lower income families in America. To avoid that both parents would be forced to work, you need to have minimum incomes that are high enough to feed an entire family. How much is the minimum wage in america and how well can one person provide for a family with it? Would you like to raise 2 kids with only that much money?

Another thing is your idea that "women should gravitate to careers that will give the maximum flexibility so that they can spend all the needed time with their children". What kind of career is that? What jobs allow you to have "maximum flexibility" in terms or worktime? Drug dealing? E-Mail spamming? Porn?
I'm sure such jobs exist but I'd say they're very, very rare. Not a viable solution.

You call it "guidelines not rules" but maybe these guidelines are as antiquitated as ducking under the table when the bomb drops. We live in a brave new world, we need to do better than this. We shouldn't leave potential untapped because grampa doesn't like it. This is the 21st century, let's act like it.

There is nothing that makes women less qualified to bring home the bucks. "Think of the children" is simply a lazy argument against it and only shows the real problems of this debate: sexism and a lack of social security.

MaxWilder said:

I really hate that they bring in (mostly) unrelated crap like abortion statistics, but the core of their argument here is correct.

Yes, correct, in my opinion.

I've been thinking about this topic a lot lately, and if you are rejecting what they say about female breadwinners out of hand, you are not thinking deeply on the subject.

Certainly, every woman should have the right to do with her life as she pleases. Whether that is career, family, or some combination of the two. But I think in the coming years there will be more and more people realizing that the average woman can NOT have it all. While there will be a few exceptions, most women will not be good mothers to their children while working 40+ hours per week, and ANYBODY who doesn't give 110% to their career will not reach the highest levels of that career.

Women need to be taught young that they need to make a choice and prioritize. If you look at young girls, you will see them fantasizing from a very young age about being a mother. You will see women of all ages fantasizing about marriage. And you will see feminists telling them that they are wrong for doing that. You will see society pushing and pushing and pushing for women to choose career over family while giving nothing but lip service to the importance of family. And if you look at the statistics, you will see this is beginning to have an effect on society. More women are postponing starting a family, and some are even working through the height of their childbearing years to the point where they can no longer find a suitable mate to have children with at all.

And if they do have children, the women are not at home to raise them. Sure, they are home for the first few months to a year, then they're back to work and the children are being raised by strangers. Mom comes home in the evening and asks how everybody's day was, exactly the way dad does (assuming dad is still in the family core).

This is not a popular sentiment yet, but I believe that gender roles existed for a reason. Just looking at male and female biology, it is plain to see that (in general) men are equipped for the tasks that require strength, and women are equipped to raise children. And for most of recorded history, gender roles followed biology. I believe we are beginning to see a reckoning. It won't happen in every relationship. And of course I think we should be very careful about judging others. I think you should take this information and apply it to your own life. What kind of a family do you want? Do you want to have two working parents and kids in day care, or do you want one parent to stay home? Are you going to feel more satisfied staying home with the kids, or leaving every day to earn a paycheck? These are questions that nobody can answer but you. I think that absent a serious internal drive, women should gravitate to careers that will give the maximum flexibility so that they can spend all the needed time with their children. I think that we should be teaching our children that they can do anything, but there are certain traditional roles that tend to bring people the greatest amount of life satisfaction. And I think we need to keep doing research and watching the statistics to verify or debunk everything I have just said, because I am fully aware that it is mostly speculation and gut instinct on my part.

Video of Feb 2011 Tsunami Crashing Through Japanese Airport

Time Lapse Tornado Chase

lurgee says...

awesome sift @SpaceOddity! in the early 70's as a kid i seen the destruction of a tonado in indiana. grass stuck in brick like needles. a van shaped like a ball with a live power pole though it's center. and a silo that was spread out in a 3 mile radius. ever since that experience i have been fascinated with mother nature.

Futuristic highways in the Netherlands

ENTHUSIASTIC Crepe maker!!

Tornado Touches Down in Norman Oklahoma - May 10, 2010

Beatles Interview 1966

PlayhousePals says...

>> ^lurgee:

so jealous of you. Rubber Soul and Revolver are my favorites. you caught them at a great transition in their sound. i was ony 1 !/2 year old.



Mother Nature can be so cruel =o(
Don't be TOO jealous ... I only remember hearing what seemed like 8 notes total for all of the screaming [mine included]. I couldn't speak for a week ... ahhhh youth =o)


You were probably pretty lucky [sounds like you may have been musically inclined early on] to catch some of the great music created by many bands in the 70's and early 80's ... so, not SO far behind =oD

10 reasons this kid's parents don't like Obama

Fletch says...

^ More insane blathering from our local Repug tool. Good for a chuckle if you forget that this nutter actually believes this stupidity. Incredible how little it takes for some people to rail and vote against their own interests in the name of some cultish ideology. Gullibility, tunnel-vision, and the lack of common sense use to be culled from our species by lions and other predators. Now, these luddites multiply like rats and have become dead weight on humanity and progress. It's almost like Mother Nature's way of balancing out our decimation of the natural world. Humans overpopulate -> humans displace natural predators -> more low-intelligence, self-destructive idiots survive -> idiots infect gene pool -> raise more idiots -> vote for idiots -> humans destroy themselves -> predator population increases (if not already extinct).

Not one thing this kid said was true. I feel sorry for him. You can't pick your parents.

My Life Online - The Reply Girl Phenomenon

dannym3141 says...

I'm impressed by the number of people speaking out in favour of a "replygirl", cos i thought the term meant "an empty headed big titted youtube user who shows cleavage to make money." I'm not an exhibitionist so i wouldn't know whether it's worth it or not; to me it's not.

But in the interests of restoring the balance; i don't have respect for people who shake their tits about for money in this way. I hope she's investing some of the cash she's making for her impending retirement because i hear tits devalue rapidly with both age and familiarity. Could invest in surgery i suppose but that's a cycle that'll eventually end in mother nature's favour.

Porn - you couldn't get away from it even if you wanted to.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon