The chancellor of California’s community college system said he wants to abolish the college algebra requirement and called it a “civil rights issue” in a Wednesday interview.
Eloy Ortiz Oakley, chancellor of California Community Colleges, made the argument while speaking with NPR. He pegged algebraas overly burdensome due to the disproportionate rate at which it prevents students from graduating from community colleges; nearly 50 percent of community college students do not complete their math requirement.
“This is a civil rights issue, but this is also something that plagues all Americans — particularly low-income Americans,” said Oakley. “If you think about all the underemployed or unemployed Americans in this country who cannot connect to a job in this economy — which is unforgiving of those students who don’t have a credential — the biggest barrier for them is this algebra requirement. It’s what has kept them from achieving a credential.”
NPR suggested that Oakley was trying to improve the California community college graduation rate, pointing out that less than half of the system’s students transfer to a four-year college or obtain an associate’s degree from the community college within six years. But the chancellor denied this implication.
“Since the 1950s, we decided that the only measure of a student’s ability to reason or to do some sort of quantitative measure is algebra,” said Oakley. “What we’re saying is we want as rigorous a course as possible to determine a student’s ability to succeed, but it should be relevant to their course of study.”
The chancellor said that other higher education institutions, such as the Carnegie Foundation and the University of Texas, were pondering the change. He suggested that statistics could replace algebra as a new requirement.
“[Statistics] is a skill that we should have all of our students have with them because this affects them in their daily life.”
The Daily Caller News Foundation reached out to Oakley, but received no comment in time for press.
Three women have appeared before a court accused of gang raping a pastor who went round to their home to demand money they owed him.
Western Commonage Magistrates Court in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe, heard how the holy man was grabbed and forced onto a bed and then stripped.
The three women Sandra Ncube, 21, Riamuhetsi Mlauzi, 23, and Mongiwe Mpofu, 25, were in the dock charged with aggravated indecent assault.
Prosecutor Mr Petros Shoko said the complainant, who is not being named to spare his blushes, was a pastor at a church in Cowdray Park.
He said the male victim had gone to the home of the three women as he was owed money and he was invited inside the house to collect it.
But once inside he alleged he was grabbed by one woman around the waist and his trousers were pulled down by another who then fondled him.
Mr Shoko said: ‘On July 14 at 7pm the complainant went to the accused persons residence to collect money which Mlauzi owed.
‘They forced him to lie on the bed and undressed him. Ncube sat on his chest and he tried to push her away.
‘However Mlauzi held his legs together and sat on his top pressing him against the bed
‘Mpofu was in another room and brought condoms and placed them on the complainants manhood and helped to hold him down.
‘Ncube had sexual intercourse with the complainant once without his consent’ Mr Shoko said.
The three denied raping the pastor but admitted indecent assault.
Paedophile defending Vice Media defending satanism not surprising since child sex abuse is part of satanism
Certain body parts don’t define male or female gender, according to Planned Parenthood’s updated guidelines on how parents should talk to their kids about sexuality.
Planned Parenthood has long been a believer in hard science, arguing that a fetus is just a clump of cells, but the organization now purports that genitals don’t make a child a boy or girl. While the old Planned Parenthood recommendations rely on science to talk to preschoolers about sexuality, the new guidelines reject former advice and expound upon gender details far beyond any normal preschooler’s comprehension.
The old guidelines advised parents to tell their kids that:
- Women have breasts. Men don’t.
- Boys have penises and girls have vulvas. I’m a woman — a girl who is all grown up — so I have a vulva instead of a penis. And you’re a boy, so you have a penis instead of a vulva.
The new guidelines advise parents to say:
- Those are nipples. Everybody has nipples.
- Boy, girl, man, and woman are words that describe gender identity, and some people with the gender identities “boy” or “man” have vulvas, and some with the gender identity “girl” or “woman” have penises/testicles.
- Your genitals don’t make you a boy or a girl.
- It doesn’t matter too much what parts someone has.
Planned Parenthood’s new recommendations reject the “birds and the bees” metaphor and opt to explicitly explain how mothers get pregnant to children. The new guidelines also encourage parents to use the real names of body parts — like vulva, clitoris, penis and vagina — instead of creating nicknames when talking to their preschoolers.
In 2014, Knott and 14 of her suburbanite friends were in the city to celebrate a birthday. They crossed paths with Zachary Hesse and Andrew Haught, a gay couple, and then beat the couple while shouting anti-gay slurs. Haught’s eye socket was broken and his jaw was shattered. He had his mouth wired shut for eight months to recover from the injuries.
Now she is facing a civil suit from the victims, who are seeking $500,000 in damages from her and two men in the group, Philip Williams and Kevin Harrigan. According to the response prepared by her attorney, she is claiming self-defense. Her response says that the victims may have been injured, but it only happened because she was defending herself from Hesse, Haught, “and their friends.” The victims were alone that night, so it is unclear what “friends” Knott was supposedly afraid of, and witnesses at the trial say that the encounter began when one of the 15 friends shouted an anti-gay slur at the victims.
Knott’s response also blames Harrigan and Williams for the victims’ injuries. Harrigan and Williams each filed a response last year, and each of their responses blames the other two co-defendants. The trial, scheduled to begin in September, will have each of the three co-defendants pointing their fingers at the other two but claiming that they didn’t do anything.
Knott’s story has changed since the criminal trial, where her attorney claimed that she never “touched a soul” and even rushed to the group to try to protect the victims. Eyewitnesses and surveillance camera footage contradicted that claim.
Prosecutors also pressed charges against Harrigan and Williams, but they accepted a plea bargain that resulted in probation. Knott, the daughter of a suburban police chief, rejected the plea bargain and took her case to trial. The jury convicted her of assault and reckless endangerment.
another day another male feminist display his chauvinism towards women
Even the “Mean Girls” weren’t this mean.
Just moments after President Trump promoted Sarah Huckabee Sanders to the role of White House press secretary, she was attacked by a swarm of woman-hating liberals.
First, the propagandists at The New York Times and MSNBC questioned Sanders’ character and called her a liar, but now journalists are attacking her physical appearance.
Ira Madison, III, of The Daily Beast, likened Sanders to a drag queen in a hateful posting on Twitter.
“Butch queen first time in drags at ball,” he tweeted to his followers – along with a photograph of the press secretary.
Madison is the same “journalist” who cracked a racially-charged “joke” about Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Asian-American granddaughter during his confirmation hearings. His tweet implied Sessions had borrowed her from a Toys-R-Us store so that he could use her as a political prop. Madison later apologized and deleted the tweet.
And he also penned a disgusting attack on Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson – wondering if his rule in the Trump White House was going to be “house or field.”
Hollywood was especially unkind to Sanders.
“I fetl like Sarah Huckabee Sanders left and right eye switched places or something,” comedian Akliah Hughes wrote on Twitter.
“Sarah Huckabee Sanders looks like every woman eating lobster on a cruise ship,” “Family Guy” writer Damien Fahey tweeted.
Could you imagine the hellfire and brimstone that would’ve rained down had a journalist or comedian made similar remarks about former first lady Michelle Obama?
The outrage over the attacks on Sanders has been limited to a few conservative publications and this column.
There has been no outcry from the feminist movement or female news commentators or enlightened liberals.
It’s as if the “Nasty Woman” crowd pulled their “p—y” hats over their eyes and ears – hoping to tune out the anti-woman hate spewing from the left.
The same thing happened when “Saturday Night Live” skewered her in a deplorable body-shaming sketch.
Meanwhile, the mainstream media spent the weekend attacking the newly-appointed White House communications director for what they perceived to be sexist comments directed at Sanders.
Anthony Scaramucci told CNN’s Jake Tapper that he’s only asked one thing of Sanders.
“Sarah, if you’re watching,” he said, “I love the hair and makeup person that we had on Friday, so I’d like to continue to use the hair and makeup person.”
Critics pounced and accused Scaramucci of making comments regarding Sanders’ personal appearance. That was clearly not the case – but it did not seem to matter to the mainstream media.
His comment generated headlines in the Washington Post, The Hill, Newsweek and the list goes on and on and on.
And yet those same news outlets ignored The Daily Beast smear. It’s the kind of double standard conservative women have come to expect from the mainstream media.
Kellyanne Conway offered some sound advice to Sanders on Sunday – suggesting she ignore the “jackals and hyenas” attacking her.
“[The] irony of modern feminism is that they look right past sexist comments said about conservative women, definitely pro-life women like Sarah and me,” she told “Fox & Friends.”
Some might call Madison a thug or a bully or a small-handed guttersnipe who gets his jollies by smacking around women with cheap, misogynistic words.
And they would not be incorrect.
But if it’s all the same – I’ll just call him a sexist pig.
In a shocking incident that has come to light in Tamil Nadu’s Vellore, a woman has been accused of cutting off her husband’s genitals after a heated argument. The husband must had never even thought that an argument with his wife will take such an ugly turn and pose such life threatening. The Police arrested the woman who is named Sarasu at Gudiyattam when she was on her way to her parent’s home. She was carrying the man’s chopped penis with her when she was arrested. Police Officer MT Irudhyaraj told Times of India, “We arrested the woman today when she was on her way to her parents’ house in V Kotta. She was carrying in her purse the chopped off part of her husband’s genital.”
Sarasu and her husband had been living separately for a year. Her children used to stay with her husband while she stayed with her parents. Her 13-year-old son had pleaded her to come for his birthday earlier in the week, to which Sarasu agreed. However, on Wednesday things took an ugly turn when Sarasu and her husband had a fight. “The wordy quarrel continued till 2am on Thursday and he went to sleep. Around 3am, Sarasu brought a sharp knife from the kitchen and cut off her husband’s penis and left the house with the chopped off part,” said officer A Krishnamoorthy.
However, in a different report published in The New Indian Express it is reported that Sarasu took the extreme step when her husband tried to force himself on her. In order to save herself from such heinous crime she ran to the kitchen and grabbed a knife with which she proceeded to chop off her husband’s penis. The man’s terrifying screams alerted the neighbours who rushed him to the Gudiyatham Government Hospital.
This article explores the field of policy, activism, and educational activity around the issue of women’s under-representation in science, engineering, and technology (or Women in SET) which has developed since the 1970s in Europe and North America. Critical, radical, and postmodern feminist ideas are marginal in this field, despite the existence of a body of feminist literature on the inter-relationships between gender and SET. Evidence is presented from in-depth interviews with Women in SET activists, most of whom were employed in scientific and technical professions, exploring their reluctance to claim an allegiance with feminism. Bourdieu’s concept of habitus is used in an attempt to show how these dispositions are connected to the internal dynamics of the Women in SET field and the wider field of SET. It is argued that the activists’ ‘feel for the game’ incorporates a disposition towards reformism and ‘neutrality’ that relies in part on a dis-identification with feminism. It is therefore concluded that in addition to other factors such as the wider shift in gender politics and the role of personal experience, the status of feminism within particular social fields may be connected to the structures of these spaces and the relative compatibility of resultant dispositions with a feminist identification. The ‘reformist habitus’ of Women in SET activists, which is directly connected to the constraints under which they work, is posited as a contributing factor to the lack of progress made on Women in SET issues since the 1970s.