Thank you. And perhaps you need to indicate when it's sarcasm since none of us "got it"
That's not sarcasm, it's backtracking.
Thank you. And perhaps you need to indicate when it's sarcasm since none of us "got it"
Like I said, the dues are not that serious. The average GM autoworker pays less than $1000 per year, Ford and Chrysler both pay less than $700 per year. They would barely notice it had been taken from their check. Yet EVEN with all the advantages of union membership other car companies employees are opting not to unionized and even employees of the big 3 don't want to be members. Why is that?
I stand corrected, it was the unions AND the CEO that Killed Hostess, each in different measure. The CEO more than the union, but the union took a stab at the company as well.
I do see in this issue a failure of women, as a political coalition, actively organizing and educating their sisters that prohibitions on womens reproductive rights by legislatures dominated by conservative males is a strike at the very core of liberty for all women. Ya'll need to get out there proactively and motivate your sisters with the knowledge that if a man controls your reproductive rights, he controls you and that you essentially have no liberty. Only those granted to you by your pater familiaris.
The transvaginal ultrasound can ONLY be a punishment. I have three children, I have never even seen one of these. They were NEVER used.
Like I said, the dues are not that serious. The average GM autoworker pays less than $1000 per year, Ford and Chrysler both pay less than $700 per year. They would barely notice it had been taken from their check. Yet EVEN with all the advantages of union membership other car companies employees are opting not to unionized and even employees of the big 3 don't want to be members. Why is that?
Men can help. You need to educate them too. You are, after all, supposed to be smarter than we are. So.....enough with the excuses. You have the numbers, you have the brains......get r done!!We have done a LOT in the last 50 years. We're still working on it. It's hard to do when the media is so controlled by men and by conservatives. But we're working on it. As I said, we need to get a lot more women in office; I don't expect to depend on men to make that happen.
Any more nonsense completely divorced from reality you'd like to add there Damo?It is because they don't see the benefit they are paying for and often are forced to pay for what is essentially an arm of a political party. Basically, every three years they vote to go on strike because the Union tells them it will give them some advantage at the negotiating table, then they lose still more of their benefits while still being promised what they fully understand to be an unsustainable rate of growth in their retirement funds. Then each election year they watch their money go into the coffers of political campaigns that also produce nothing to benefit them.
It's what they "see", Mott.Any more nonsense completely divorced from reality you'd like to add there Damo?
You'd have to be a moron to work for the big three and not see the value of UAW. I know my sister, the dues paying Ford worker, makes $20,000 a year more in total compensation than her Honda colleagues down the road and has better working conditions and could negotiate even more compensation for their productivity if it wasn't for those mouth breathing semi-literate southern conservatives who keep perversely undermining the labor market in this nation.
First, the one used on my wife during early pregnancy was nothing close to that large, is it antique? Nothing really to do with the thread, just realistically, they are, from what we experienced, about as thick as a finger and about a third the length of just the top of that thing.
Second, during the first eighteen years of my life, because my father had intestinal cancer, I had to go through a colonoscopy once per year. Nowadays they put you to sleep, back then they didn't. The frickin' proctologist would hold a conversation with you and ask if you wanted to look into the scope, while painfully, and gleefully I'm to understand, pumping in air that would never escape until you were in a crowded elevator. The length of the scope was far, far, far, longer than that antique.
Now, imagine going through that NOT because of a family history of cancer; NOT because you had a risky pregnancy; but because someone decided they were going to make you go through it "just because". Not for a medical reason, but because they thought you should do it because you were doing something they didn't agree with - let's say in order to get a Viagra prescription.
First, the one used on my wife during early pregnancy was nothing close to that large, is it antique? Nothing really to do with the thread, just realistically, they are, from what we experienced, about as thick as a finger and about a third the length of just the top of that thing.
Second, during the first eighteen years of my life, because my father had intestinal cancer, I had to go through a colonoscopy once per year. Nowadays they put you to sleep, back then they didn't. The frickin' proctologist would hold a conversation with you and ask if you wanted to look into the scope, while painfully, and gleefully I'm to understand, pumping in air that would never escape until you were in a crowded elevator. The length of the scope was far, far, far, longer than that antique.
Uhhhh TMI Damo and we do see your point.....in a western manly man sort of way...... but I think you're missing a pretty big point here. They didn't perform the colonoscopy against your consent.First, the one used on my wife during early pregnancy was nothing close to that large, is it antique? Nothing really to do with the thread, just realistically, they are, from what we experienced, about as thick as a finger and about a third the length of just the top of that thing.
Second, during the first eighteen years of my life, because my father had intestinal cancer, I had to go through a colonoscopy once per year. Nowadays they put you to sleep, back then they didn't. The frickin' proctologist would hold a conversation with you and ask if you wanted to look into the scope, while painfully, and gleefully I'm to understand, pumping in air that would never escape until you were in a crowded elevator. The length of the scope was far, far, far, longer than that antique.
http://uppercasewoman.com/2012/02/28/requiring-ultrasounds-for-women-seeking-abortions-sucks/
Howey's might be slightly bigger (he he), but there is an actual ultra sound wand, and you are downplaying it.
Further, they freaking hurt.
No one gives a shit about your colon problems, you are the biggest mansplainer on here. You must have missed the part about being MEDICALLY UNNECESSARY. I have had it with you. How dare you. We all go through unpleasant medical experiences. They are irrelevant to YOUR party forcing non-consenting women to be penetrated by a foreign object as punishment for accessing a legal procedure. You will do anything to cover that up. Including talking about how small it is! Well, hey, if a man with a small dick rapes a woman, let's just plead that down to a tailgating charge!
Sick. Sick. Sick.
That would make a bit more sense if I was actually speaking for the probe. I've told you before, but you apparently forgot, I believe in something a bit different than that. That post was literally a sidebar, a bit of my own personal experience with having unwanted articles stuffed up an out orifice, and information: The actually vaginal ultrasound is much, much smaller than that gargantuan thing he pictured.
..
This again would make far more sense if I was actually for the probe.
And no, I'm not downplaying it.
Here is one that is slightly larger than the one I watched used on my wife:
![]()
The attempt to shock with one obviously made for a large animal veterinarian rather than one for a human doesn't help your argument.
Go fuck yourself.
And may you be blessed.