Rape is gendered because it is gendered violence. Men who are targeted (and men make up 15% of rape victims) are more likely to be children or teenagers than female survivors, and more likely to have intersecting oppressions otherwise. Rape is a crime of power, and men of perceived lower status are vulnerable just like women. However, if we actually want to prevent rape we need to stop rapists from raping. That means targeting the men who commit rape is the most effective solution, since men commit 98% of rapes. If we wipe out 96% of rapes and suddenly rapists are gender-balanced, it will make sense to focus equal resources. However, both male and female survivors will be best served by dismantling the patriarchy that enables rape culture, that makes rapes against women "natural" and rapes against men a joke. There is nothing anti-male about it; it is anti-patriarchy, which harms both men and women.

If there are men reading this who seek support, resources do exist. http://www.pandys.org/malesurvivors.html has links to national hotlines that can provide referrals.

We have no information about whether he pursued legal means at all. Since he wasn't pursuing legal means, in fact, my first suspicion would be that his son was legally living abroad. As you point out, treaties exist for cases where children are unlawfully transported across borders.

You are assuming "justice" is automatically on his side. We have no information about the case: whether she was granted sole custody, whether he left them or why they were estranged in the first place. We don't know if they were even married in the US; he could have been working abroad and returned to the US alone.

I'm not saying that his wife is an angel, or that he might not have been devastated by the loss of his son, but when his primary worry when dealing with the undercover FBI agent was making sure bad things happen to her I'm pretty sure that she's not lying if she claims he's a dangerous "stalker".

There is a ton of work available in C++ where I am. I've worked in C++ for about 8 years, having come from the Java world, and routinely worked with coworkers nearing retirement. Even better, many of the skills and good habits you may have acquired in more functional and finicky languages can prove useful.

If you want to pick up something cutting-edge and fresh, I'd highly recommend generic GPU programming. Highly sought after by computer vision and scientific computation, it feels like assembly and writes like C on LSD. There also just aren't all that many people in the field yet, so it's still at the point where writing a frame differencing algorithm on your home machine can be a foot in the door.

We usually see fewer women make it to our interview process, but hire a lot more of those who do. I've usually chalked it up to women being less likely to bluff or bluster; we more often find that we've brought in dudes who talk a good game and can write a function, but when push comes to shove either the skills aren't there or their ego is big enough it'd need its own cube. Women we're more likely to be able to filter out early on. "How good are you?" usually gets a nervous chuckle followed by a diplomatic but pretty accurate assessment, for example.

Women left: citation http://www.nber.org/papers/w15853.pdf

Pair-programming is the "extreme" version of code review, so that makes sense. Google certainly doesn't have universal pair-programming. In general, I would hazard a guess that pair-programming is the least commonly employed Agile practice.

Ken Thompson didn't need source control either.

How often do you release code? My projects take anywhere from half a day to three weeks, and I am expected to have self-documenting code. "Presenting" code would probably have taken nearly as long as some whole projects, and an hour is far longer than most of us ever spend on a code review.

I'm assuming part of the issue is how we are defining "code review". Day-long, or even hour-long, in-person conferences would never fit into our workflow. Online, collaborative code reviews do, and can be done well in maker's time.

And then that guy comes on Slashdot to complain about how useless code reviews are.

Code reviews are a way to shape code to conform to social norms. They allow for community-owned commits to community-owned code, and the development of a collaborative, shared culture. In the absence of such a society, or the desire to create one, code reviews will be no more constructive than a debate between Glen Beck and Rachel Maddow. Some people don't want to give up agency and independence, and for them code reviews can at best be a smarter compiler check. But at their best they can allow the creation of a program that transcends its individual contributors.

Someone will have to do that eventually anyway. Whether it is before that code is released or when something breaks while that coder is on vacation, it is more efficient to have multiple people aware of the code and familiar enough to give good feedback. The right answer is to just do it. My PHBes don't notice the coders who spend half their time reading slashdot, why should they notice code reviews?

Actually, half the children in America qualify for free or reduced-price lunches, and 25% of them are living in poverty. We don't have nearly as many programs supporting children, or providing health care to women of childbearing age, as we do retirees. It shows.

It wouldn't quite be cheaper to simply provide free lunches to all children than it is to have the administrative overhead of verifying eligibility, but only barely.

It's the governments job to make sure I actually am empowered, in that I am able to have agency over my own life. I would much prefer if they set about making sure I am not stuck in a terrible economy because some people think it's awesome to introduce contractionary fiscal policy mid-downturn. The government should be dealing with the business cycle, not offering me interview tips or capes. Though at least they spent money on the capes; at this point any government spending is good.

You're right; she's not a girl. She's a woman. Calling anyone over the age of 18 a "girl" pretty much destroys your credibility. On any topic, but especially other people's identities.

Are you calling all women with breast implants mentally ill? Because I don't think everyone here is going to appreciate you campaign against enhanced breasts.

One note: her gender is unrelated to her sexuality. Both cis* and trans* folks can be straight, gay, bisexual or not have any sort of gender fetish at all. A transexual woman is straight if she is attracted to men and gay if she's attracted to women, a transexual man is straight if he's attracted to women, gay if he's attracted to men.

There are also people (about 1/3rd of the population, according to some studies), who don't have strong gender identities at all. Most often such people conform to their assigned gender because it involves the least possible effort. Gender is simultaneously a physical identification (mostly likely located in the sensorimotor cortex), a social identification and a role-based identification. Trying to lump all three meanings together simply leads to frustration, stereotypes and artificial limits on behavior.