The Female Officers Shouldn’t Have Their Hair Tied Up in a Ponytail, Instead, It Should be in a Bun, on Gender Discrimination

If THIS is NOT sexism, I don’t know WHAT would be, from the Front Page Sections, translated…

The Kaohsiung city’s police department awhile ago, mandated that if the female officers have long hair, then, they MUST braid their hair up in buns, instead of wearing their hair in ponytails, and this caused the entry level officers’ displeasures; the Kaohsiung City Police Department told, that this, is the rule set up by the police department headquarters, that the city was merely, “enforcing the rules”.  Based off of understanding though, other cities elsewhere doesn’t forcefully make the female officers tie their hair up into buns, it’s quite prevalent, that female officers wear their hair in ponytails.

On the Facebook Fan’s page, “Police Suck”, there were female entry level officers who’d disclosed, that the manager’s office of Kaohsiung Police Department, on the 2^nd of this month, issued an “most urgent” notice, stated how the rules of appearances for the police department from twelve years ago had already stated, “Female officers should NOT wear their hair braided, when they’re in uniform, their hair shall NOT exceed shoulder length; and when the hair exceeded shoulder length, the officers MUST wear it up into a bun, and must use black bands to tie up the hair.”, the article also mentioned, that recently, there were female officers who went on calls in their ponytails, and were asked to wear their hair differently.

The female officer who’d disclosed this had said, “saving the hair, losing the head, saving the head, losing the hair”, the rule of having the female officers braid their hair up into buns will cause them a TON of time to get ready, “When you’re out on the field, it’s the speediness that counts, NOT how good you looked.”  “Are we all going to become like those ladies from Tzu-Chih?”; plus, when they rode out on their motorcycles, “how the hell are we supposed to put our helmets on?”

The head inspector from the Kaohsiung police department, Lee said, because there had been sightings of female officers’ ponytail passing shoulder-length, and there were, quite a number of them, that the office was merely, “showing concerns” for the entry level employees, and will take the opinions of the workers into considerations, and report it up to the upper levels, and, to discuss it further.

Lee explained, that when the female officers are out on calls, if there were physical altercations with the bad guys, then, they may get their hair pulled, that there are safety concerns on the issues, but for now, they’re not going to reprimand the female officers who don’t follow the rules of tying their hair up in a bun when they come to work.

Recently, there had been multiple subprecincts that had received “warnings” from the inspector’s offices, and there were uniformed female officers who’d voiced their concerns on the matter, and, all they got was the replies of “it’s the rules!”

The entry level female officer told, that it’s easier, to tie their hair up in ponytails, it’s swift, that she’d never compromised her own safety, or the safety of others, wearing her hair in a ponytail, as she went on calls, “It’s too far-fetched, tying the problems of safety with our ponytails”, plus, wearing the hair in a bun, it takes too much time, and you must use a pin to keep it in place, the hair would mess up easily.  There were angry female officers who’d stated, that does that mean that ALL female officers who wear their hair in ponytails would get subdued by the bad guys?  That this, is thinking using the masculine mindsets to judge the female officers’ way of working.

The entry level female officers believed, that when they went out on calls, and wear their hair up in a bun, it would be uncomfortable, having to put their helmets on; and if the police department decided to enforce the rules, they will all, trim their hair short.

The female officer who’d told about this said, that she hoped, that in not affecting the way that the officers appeared, do give the female officers, the same amount to respect, and the right to decide, “This, is a good time, to remind those higher up officials, our superiors, to think hard, about keeping up with the looks!”

So, if this is NOT sexist, then, I don’t know what is!  I mean, hello, just because the ladies wear their long hair in ponytail, that still doesn’t make their work less efficient, and, I’m sure, that it would matter LESS, if a female officer in a bun manages to catch a bad guy, or if it was, a lady officer in a ponytail, who’d caught a bad guy, and this rule for the police precincts is still jut SEXIST and BULLSHIT if you ask me, but hey, who asked Y-O-U!!!

Advertisements

Another Unarmed Man Got Shot by the Police…

Another Unarmed, Minority Man Got Shot by the Police…

Call it another case like Ferguson if you will, and, this will still, keep repeating itself, until the world E-N-D-S, from MSNNEWS.com, written by E.M. Johnson, edited by: C. Johnston, E. Beech…

Police officers who fatally shot a Mexican farm worker in Washington state after he pelted them with rocks fired 17 shots at the man, striking him five or six times, police said on Wednesday, in an incident that has fueled protests.

Antonio Zambrano-Montes, 35, an unemployed orchard worker from Mexico’s Michoacan state, was killed earlier this month in Pasco, a city of 68,000 residents in Washington state’s agricultural heartland, in a shooting captured on video.

His death sparked protests by demonstrators who accused Pasco police of overly aggressive tactics in dealing with the Hispanic community and who likened the shooting to two high-profile police killings of unarmed black men in Ferguson, Missouri, and in New York City.

Police said that officers responding to a report of a man throwing rocks at passing cars shot Zambrano-Montes after he began pelting them with rocks and ignored commands to surrender. They said a stun gun had also failed to subdue him.

Kennewick Police Sergeant Ken Lattin, a spokesman for a special unit investigating the case, told reporters on Wednesday that all three of the officers involved in the incident had fired their weapons.

“Did he have some sort of injury? Did he have some mental health situations that he was dealing with in the days and hours (before the incident)? Or was he under the influence of drugs? We need to know,” Lattin said.

A video of the incident uploaded to the Internet shows Zambrano-Montes running from officers and then briefly turning and raising his arm before he was killed. Police did not say where on his body was struck, but they did say he was not shot in the back.

Lattin said a rock was found next to Zambrano-Montes’ body. He was not armed with a gun or knife. Two of the officers were struck with rocks and treated at the scene.

Rights groups have urged the U.S. Justice Department to launch an investigation into the incident, which the Mexican government has condemned as a disproportionate use of lethal force. A lawyer for the man’s family has said his constitutional rights were violated.

The three officers involved in the incident, including one who is Hispanic, were placed on administrative leave pending an internal probe.

So, you still think that the world had improved, and changed that much???  Think AGAIN!!!  Because this kind of situation had happened, so many times already, and yet, civilization still NEVER learn, why IS that???  Why must we try to fit one another into those small, cubic boxes of race, gender, nationality, etc., etc., etc.???

Attacks Compel Muslims to Reflect, by: D. D. Kirkpatrick

From The New York Times International Weekly that came with the papers today…

CAIRO—The rush of horrific attacks in the name of Islam is spurring and anguished debate among Muslims here in the heart f the Islamic world about why their religion appears cited so often as a cause for violence and bloodshed.

The majority of scholars and the faithful say Islam is no more inherently violent than other religions.  But some Muslims argue that the contemporary understanding of their religion is infected with justifications for violence, requiring the government and its official clerics to correct the teaching of Islam.

“It is unbelievable that the thought we hold holy pushed the Muslim community to be a source of worry, fear, danger, murder and destruction to all the world,” President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt lamented in a recent speech to clerics of the official religious establishment, calling for a “religious revolution.”

Others, thought, insist that the violence—such as the recent massacre of a dozen people at a French newspaper’s offices and the killings of four shoppers at a kosher grocery store in Paris—is caused by alienation and resentment, not theology.  They argue that the authoritarian rulers of Arab states—who have tried for decades to control Muslim teaching and the application of Islamic law—have set off a violent backlash expressed in religious ideas and language.  Promoted by groups like the Islamic State or Al Qaeda, that discourse echoes through Muslim communities as far away as New York or Paris, whose influence and culture still loom over much of the Muslim world.

“Some people who feel crushed or ignored will go toward extremism, and they use religion because that is what they have at hand,” said Said Ferjani, an official of Tunisia’s mainstream Islamist party, Ennahda, speaking about violence in the name of Islam.

Khaled Fahmy, an Egyptian historian, was teaching at New York University on September 11, 2001, after which American sales of the Quran spiked because readers sought religious explanations for the attack on New York.  “We try to explain that they are asking the wrong question,” he said.  Religion, he argued, was “just a veneer” for anger at the dysfunctional Arab states left behind by colonial powers and the “Orientalist” condescension many Arabs still feel from the West.

Only a very small number blame Islam itself.  “What has ISIS done that Muhammad did not do?” an outspoken atheist, Ahmed Harqan, recently asked on a talk show here, using common shorthand for the Islamic State to argue that the problem of violence is inherent to Islam.

His challenge provoked an outcry from Islamic religious broadcasters.  Salem Abdel-Gel-il, a scholar from the state-sponsored Al Azhar institute, fired back with Islamic verses about tolerance, peace and freedom.  Then he warned that the public espousal of atheism might land his opponents in jail.

Steven Fish of California, Berkley, sought to quantify the correlation between Islam and violence. In his book, “Are Muslims Distinctive?,” he found that murder rates were substantially lower in Muslim-majority countries and instances of political violence were no more frequent.

In the Muslim world, however, the debate over Islam’s connection to violence has been given new impetus in recent events: the military ouster of the Islamist elected as president of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi; the deadly crackdown on his supporters in the Muslim Brotherhood and a retaliatory campaign of attacks on security forces; and the rise of the bloodthirsty Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.

Mr. Sisi, a former general, led the ouster of the Islamic president in 2013 and the suppression of the Brotherhood on charges that it was a violent “terrorist group.” (The group has denounced violence for decades.)

Intellectuals supporting him have applauded his efforts and called for the state of lead a sweeping top-down overhaul of the popular understanding of Islam.  “Religious thought, or religious discourse, is afflicted with backwardness,” Gaber Asfour, the minister of culture, declared.

Many pro-government intellectuals consider the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood an aspect of that awkwardness and argue that all such Islamist political movements are inherently violent—even if the groups publicly disavow violence.  “Their task is not becoming modern; it is become hegemonic again, making a new world in which Islam will be on top again,” argued Sherif Younis, a historian at the Helwan University here.

“Every fundamentalist has in mind a counter-regime, even if he does not know how to use a knife,” Professor Younis said.  That includes the mainstream Islamists of the Brotherhood and the ultraconservatives known as Salafis, as well as the overtly violent jihadist groups like the Islamic States of al-Qaeda, he said.

Others argue that the state control of the Muslim religious establishment only reinforces the problems.  Some say it is also naïve to expect unaccountable governments like Egypt’s that cannot provide a healthcare or education to do a better job leading religious reform.

“In an authoritarian society, there is no room for reasoned debate, so it is not surprising that irrational religious discourse is going to flourish in certain quarters of Egypt or the Arab world,” argued Mohammad Fadel, an Egyptian-American Islamic legal scholar at the University of Toronto.  “But the answer of these governments has been to double down on repression and that is only likely to increase the extremism.”

And so, the CORE of the Islamic being viewed as violent is totally BULLSHIT!!!  There are just a few of the members from the whole pool of the public that are acting out violent, and, we, in the modern and civilized world start labeling the REST of the population as way too M***ER F***ING violent?  C’mon, where’s the TOLERANCE?  Oh yeah, I forgot, because I wasn’t the one who got ATTACKED, so, I wouldn’t KNOW how those who were attacked or know those who were attacked feels like, right???  Think again!!!  I mean, I HAVE the empathies, but, do you???

 

 

 

 

She’s Way Out of His League

A Q&A, translated…

Q A pair of worried parents wrote…

Their daughter who graduated college this year, all of a sudden told them, that she fell in love with a man who is nine years her senior in high school, the man was twenty-six then.  And U only graduated from middle school, comes from a single-parent family; his eldest brother is unwed, his second eldest has two children.

After U divorced, his only daughter was in the custody of his ex-wife.  And, the whole family lived off of the shows they’d performed, only U started working odds and ends, to help supply for the family’s expenses.

Their daughter is very into her boyfriend, the mother said that U wasn’t well-educated enough, that he wasn’t from a good enough family, the daughter told her, “a high degree doesn’t mean good character either; nor does it mean, that he’ll be nice to you, to take care of the family, and may not have a steady job.  The boyfriend, U, wasn’t well-educated, sure, but he’s willing to work hard, doesn’t spend carelessly.  As to why he doesn’t have any money saved up?  Because he took care of his family, is a good son, took home ALL of his pay, didn’t keep a cent to himself, would rather have it hard himself, rather than having his mother deal with the hardships of life.  And, it wasn’t his choosing, to be born in such a lousy family, how could he be blamed?”  After knowing each other for so long, U had always been kind toward her, if he didn’t have good intentions, she would totally know, so why wouldn’t the parents let go of their stereotypes, and accept him?

The parents believed, that the daughter is WAY too good for the man, that she’s way out of his league, and that they’re worried, that their daughter might get tricked or scammed by him, because his twenty-six, and she was merely a high school student back then.  Neither wanted to back down, the parents didn’t have any other thoughts, they just wanted to pull their daughter back.

A My Opinion

The reason that the parents were against this, is mostly due to their socioeconomic statuses and level of education, feared that after their daughter married, she will have a TON of hardship to bear.  The problem is, the daughter had set up her mind, “I’m old enough, have my own thoughts, and can make my own decisions.  If he’d lied to me, or treated me wrong, there’s NO way I would stay by him for so long.” My advice, is that the parents should meet the man first, to get to know one another better.  And, even IF they’d met, it still may NOT change their prejudices.  It seems, that the daughter’s persistence is like a carriage with nine horses, pulling outward, and there’s nothing that the parents CAN do, to pull her back for the time being.  And I’m really surprised, as to how come this daughter had been dating U for over seven years, and the parents didn’t know about it, and, in these seven years, they’d already lost the influence over their daughter’s choice.

Change a thought, maybe, just open up about the rules, allow them to date, for another one, to two years on end, and, whether or not she’s way out of his league, so long as your daughter is willing to bear the consequences of her decision, however hard or easy it will be for her, it’s all her choice then.

And so, these parents fell absolutely HELPLESS, over how their daughter was insistent on dating this man, whom they believed, was LOWER in the status quo, than they are.  Well, parents, who the FUCK gave you the right, to judge someone, because he came from a bad family background?  Because you’re way too worried about your own flesh-and-blood’s wellbeing?  Isn’t it more important, that your daughter’s happy with this man, that she loves him, and isn’t it also important, that he treats her kind, takes care of her, even though, he doesn’t have ANY money?  The parents’ values are the ones that needed resetting in this one.

Changing Tracks, Gaining the Acceptance

On parent-child interactions, translated…

This year, my eldest daughter who’s in New York, entered into TWO international clothes design competitions: she’d earned the top prize from Spain; and in her entry in Italy, she’d gotten into top ten, and in July, she will enter into the finals.  These two international clothing design competition, my daughter was the only Taiwanese person who’d earned an award, and, she could be the pride of Taiwan, I suppose!

Recalling how years ago, when my daughter asked if she could change tracks, I not only didn’t encourage her, I’d even used sarcasms and mockeries, to show how unsupportive I was of her choice in life.  I’d used my way of thought from when I was raised, to put down my own children, not believing that my kids would have what it takes, to make their own dreams come true.  But now, my daughter, used what she has herself, and gained great accolades, that, was outside of my expectations that’s for sure, other than being happy about it, it made me introspect.

All the way to the top, my eldest daughter was filled with a TON of courage and hardship confronting her choice, originally, she’d already received a master degree in physical therapy from Yang-Ming University, she’d worked at the hospitals as a physical therapist for multiple years, she was paid very well, with steady scheduling too.  Other than work, she’d taken night courses on clothing designs at Shi-Jien University at night, it took her a total of a year and a half, for her to get her degree in that.  I thought, that that, was only her hobby from outside of work, without realizing, that she’s getting closer to her own personal goals in life.

One day, she’d abruptly told me she wanted to get a master in clothing design in the States, back then, I was furious, I strongly told her no.  Because that, was totally unrelated to what she’d taken her courses in before; I recommended that she go for a speech therapist degree, or to test for a therapist certificate in the States, that, would be the right thing to do.  Plus, her two younger sisters are still in school too, and we still have yet to pay up our home loans, economically, it would be hard, for us to give her any monetary supports.  I questioned her about why she didn’t choose the clothes designs major when she’d gone to college, then, it would’ve saved her this whole detour.  She asked us, “Would you have agreed?”

But, my daughter refused to get beaten, for her own dreams, she’d quitted her job at the hospitals, and entered into the economics department’s clothes design competition in Taiwan, she’d gotten first place in the 2010 competitions, at the same time, she’d passed her TOEFL exams, and sent her applications to two of the namely clothes designs graduate schools, and she’d gotten accepted in both, and was offered scholarships too, in the end, she’d chosen to head to New York to take courses in Parsons School of Designs.

And here, I want to give some advice, based off of my own experiences, respect, and believe in your own children, don’t be like me, careful on everything to the point of being unsupportive.  As parents, we should learn to let go when we are supposed to, allowing our kids to do what they enjoy, and, younger generations, if you still have dreams, go ahead, go after them!

And no, you still didn’t hear THIS from me, this, was the experience of a mother, who was all too UNSUPPORTIVE of her own offspring’s dreams, but, her daughter did NOT let the parents’ expectations beat her down, she still went AFTER her own dreams, and now, she’s an achieved clothes designer, she’d made it to the top, and now, the mother looks back, and see how wrong she was, and, had she been just a bit MORE supportive, then………well, it’s too late for that now, because we will eventually grow up, and then, we will NOT need you, parents, anymore!

The Assemblies in Missouri Won’t Dissipate, Seven Members of the Rioters Were Arrested

On the recent shooting of an African American teen by cops in the U.S.A., from the Front Page Sections, translated…

When the curfew for the city of Ferguson, Missouri took place on the early morning of the 17^th, there were two hundred rioters who ignored it, and kept gathering in the place where the eighteen-year-old youth, Brown, was shot and murdered brutally by the police.  The police shot the gas bombs into the crowd and threw tear gas toward the crowd too, managed to arrest seven individuals.  At the same district, there was also a murder by guns too.

The governor, Nixon, on the 16^th, declared that Ferguson is in a state of emergency on the 16^th, and from midnight of the 17^th, started enforcing a curfew, which was ended at five in the morn.  Over a hundred of the public who’d gathered, left in peace before the curfew started, and, Ferguson was peaceful, save for the place where the teenager was shot, where the protestors ignored the curfews and still gathered, screaming, “NO CURFEWS!”

Not long thereafter, heavily armed police started shooting gas and tear bombs into the crowd, and slowly moved forward, to stop the crowd from gathering up.

When the police was at a standoff with the protestors, someone was shot in the same area, the police had yet to identify the injured victim, Johnson stressed, that the man injured was NOT shot by the police, and the man who’d shot him is still at large.

The governor, Nixon said, that the curfews had helped maintain order in Ferguson, and, the curfews will be lifted, as the local government sees fitting.

After Brown was shot by a white police officer, Wilson, on the ninth, the racial tension is on the rise locally, and, the residents had multiple times started riots, and there were those who took advantage of the situation.  Johnson pointed out, that there were forty FBI agents who made house calls since the sixteenth, to find the witnesses to the shooting, and a few weeks from now, hopefully, everything will be cleared up.

Once again, the locals saw this as a racial thing, and, maybe it IS a racial thing, after all, NOBODY would EVER mistake a WHITE dude, holding something that’s NOT threatening, and SHOOT him, and this young man was shot, because of his skin color, so, no wonder the local residents are PISSED off about it.

White American Officers Shot an African American Adolescent, and Thousands of Americans Protested about It

And no, your time machines still didn’t CRASH, and landed your separate ASSES back in the 1960s-ish???  This IS racial profiling, stereotype, at ITS worst, and it had happened, in the U.S.A. the “land of the free”???  From the Front Page Section, translated…

On the ninth, when the Ferguson police of Missouri was out on duty, they’d had a physical confrontation with an eighteen-year-old African American male, Brown, who was unarmed, and the police used guns, fired off several shots, and killed Brown.  And, Brown’s death had gotten over a thousand of the citizens in the public to gather up and protest, and, it’d led to a riot between the police and the citizens, along with the angry mob, breaking into stores, and destroying the police squad cars.

The chief of police of St. Louis in the press conference, stated, that two officers had bumped into Brown and another male close to an apartment compound, as the police were getting out of their patrol cars, Brown attempted to push the officers back inside and attempted to reach for the guns that the police officers carried.  The police fired a shot inside the squad car, and, after the physical confrontation continued on the streets, Brown had died of multiple gunshot wounds about thirty-five feet away from where the squad car was.  And the witnesses claimed that they saw Brown get shot eight times.

And, the public and the police engaged in a he-said she-said on what had happened.  Based off of the companion who was with Brown, Johnson, they were walking down the streets, when the police called out to them, and pulled out their guns, and started shooting at Brown, as Brown turned around, raised up his arms, was about to get on the ground, the police got close to him, and, fired off several shots toward him, and they weren’t involved in any arguments or confrontations.  And Johnson was not under arrest either.

On the tenth when the police held a press conference, over a hundred residents gathered outside the Ferguson Police Station, some of the civilians had gotten so angered and moved into the close by police quarters, raising up their hands, screamed out, “do NOT shoot me”, they acted as if they are needing mercy from the officers.  The police held down the fortress, and then, the mob of people dissipated.

But, on the night when they’d held a candlelight vigil prayer session at the scene of where Brown got shot, the crowd got out of control and it became a riot.  Over a thousand had attended this candlelight vigil, and afterwards, some of the protestors got into it with the police, and started robbing the stores on the streets.  The convenience store of a gas station nearby was robbed, a nearby Wal-Mart was robbed too, and there were those who’d jumped UP onto the squad cars, to start something, or to vandalize the properties.  The police took their dogs and started throwing tear gas into the public, but, the local police force was NOT enough, and so, the neighboring areas’ police were called on to help out.

This case had gotten the attention of the local civil rights leaders, and they stated that this, was exactly like the 2012 case where an unarmed seventeen-year-old African American who was killed by a WHITE officer, Zimmerman, and, Zimmerman was found not guilty by the courts.

And now, they don’t know if the office who’d shot Brown was white or not, Ferguson is a predominantly black neighborhood north of St. Louis, in the suburbs.  The people who were critical about this claimed, that when the St. Louis area officers were out, making their rounds, they specifically targeted African American youths.

Brown’s mother said, that Brown had just graduated from high school this year, and was about to head off to a local university.

And so, history is still repeating itself here, and there WERE previous cases, I just can’t recall the years that those previous cases had happened, and, it’s JUST like what we’d learned about in social psyc, that the police would more than likely to see a minority (like African Americans???) with a harmless object, and see the person holding something threatening, versus if they were face-to-face with a WHITE man, and this, is ONE MORE (and I’m quite certain that it still won’t BE the last!!!) case where the color of one’s skin got you brutally KILLED by the police.