You don't need to find a toy that is gender neutral, but you have to give the kid what he or she is interested in! The problem isn't kids not being interested in the "opposite sex toy", it's parents being locked in their gender traditional point of view and their insistence how boys and girls "ought to be".
Just you wait 'til the rich trash gets a whiff of that, and the next fad will be leather from certain animals with pedigree.
As soon as they're interested in it. Simple as that.
Huh? That doesn't fit into your curriculum? Then I think it's time you ponder whether your curriculum has a problem or whether you want to continue making it the kids' problem.
You're one of my 3 favorite lawyers, the other two being the lady who handled my divorce and the man who handled my bankruptcy.
Great that you found good people to handle those important things.
Some of your former colonies might disagree.
Maybe to you 4channers it is, troll, but NYCL is well known and greatly respected here at slashdot. So go back to reddit and leave us grownups alone.
Thanks, bro
Think they're afraid some people might start to like the idea?
I'm pretty sure I've heard that line in an old commercial from the 1950s...
...that there are two kinds of parents. The ones that blame everything from video games to rock music to whatever else they don't understand for whatever their teenage son or daughter fucks up (because it cannot be their fault, no way) and those parents that understand that they, the parents, and their peers have a lot more influence on their kids development than video games, music, TV or whatever other makebelieve items their kids might fall in love with every could have.
Be honest: What do you think would have more influence on you, your behaviour and our outlook on the world? The schoolyard bully that beats you up or the virtual gangster that sells you a virtual hooker?
And then please answer why you think it should be different for your kids. Why do some parents think their kids are stupid? It's usually the parents where I'm fairly sure their kids are way smarter than their parents think. And most likely smarter than their parents are.
Hey buddy, you watch your mouth when you're talking about NYCL!
All riggghhhhtttt. Thanks Amicus
No... I think people want something in between 70 words and 56 pages.
Oh. OK. How many words do they want?
It does seem insane. I mean how can the court not see that this case is clearly about killing vimeo and by extension video sharing sites. How can they expect all employees to be 100% diligent. It's never going to happen. If the only option to adhere to Safe Harbor is to have google class content filter Youtube is going to be the only game in town in the US.
The legal fees alone are the killer. Veoh won every round, but had to go out of business due to the legal fees.
Maybe it's not about killing Vimeo, but rather making it "play nice" the way YouTube has: Pay for sync licensing of the music and support the licensing costs with ads.
In my experience, their primary goal in every instance is to put people out of business, if at all possible. YouTube has been 'playing nice' with them for many years, but they haven't dropped the pending case.
The blog post linked from TFS is a brief (~70 word) summary of the recent development with no links to other posts on your blog for the background on the story, only the big PDF of the decision.
The decision, IMHO, gives you what you need to know about the facts of the case in order to understand the significance of the decision. 56 pages is enough reading in my view, for our purposes. If you want more you can go on PACER and get hundreds of additional pages from the case file.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.
