WestCoastRunner

Has anyone tried Spartan or opera? I'm also having to click 'next' numerous times to get to the end of a thread on my iPhone. I think someone mentioned that earlier

Are you suggesting women's issues are the catalyst for policy changes? Do you have a cite?

How did I make women out to be victims? Doesn't partners include men?

Yes we can including the moderators stopping trolling in its tracks.

Why is my statement ridiculous? And yes I agree women can do many things to avoid becoming pregnant but it's no reason to abolish abortions. If we did that then men who didn't want to be a biological father would be sol for sure without abortion being an option.

Besides the fact that a man can't give a woman the legal papers that he does not want to father a child before she rapes him, here are some suggestions for a man to avoid fathering a child (just so they don't have to go the legal route): A. Abstain from sex B. Have a vasectomy C. Ensure that his partner has taken the necessary precautions (all of the following): on the pill, has an iud, has a diaphragm, has access to the morning after pill (of course the male partner would have to ensure she takes this pill the morning after they have had sex) And there you go. Mission accomplished.

And that is your opinion. Fair enough.

If we took a poll right now I bet the majority of men on this forum would say hell yes.And I would start one except I'm on my smartphone.

No I don't. I wasn't joking.

It's not a frivolous statement. It's true for me.

As soon as I posted it I knew I should have corrected it but seriously it wasn't worth the extra effort. I'm pretty sure most people know including me that rape occurs on males, females, and any other beings.

That's hilarious! What if the partner is a man? And most men I know would love to be treated as a sex object.

This isn't a sensitive topic. This is about people posting immature, crude remarks under the guise of 'jokes' that are supposed to make some kind of a point. Rape is a very real and violent act towards women but I suppose anonymous cowards don't give a dam.

There are plenty of studies on how early childhood education can and will improve brain development: Intervention Can Help Kids Who Are at Risk "Through the University of North Carolina’s "Abecedarian Project," Craig Ramey and his colleagues demonstrated that intensive early intervention could greatly enhance the development of children whose mothers have low income and education levels. The children in the project were randomly assigned to receive either an intensive 5-year program of full-day, full-year child care and parent involvement activities beginning in the first few months after the child’s birth, or to receive only free formula and diapers. After just 3 years, dramatic results were evident: the program children had an average IQ score of 105, while the control group children averaged only 85. And unlike many programs which began intervention at age 4, the effects of the program on IQ held over time. The program children were less likely to repeat a grade in school and demonstrated better achievement in reading and mathematics throughout elementary and high school. At age 21, the children who participated in the 5-year program still displayed a significant intellectual advantage over the control children. Clearly this intensive, early intervention had a long-lasting impact on these children’s lives." This is an excellent slide presentation on the formation of children's brains (it notes that the most critical time for development of the brain is up to 5 years of age): "Genes and environment interact throughout brain development Genes form neurons, connections among major brain regions Environment and experience refines the connections; enhancing some connections while eliminating others"

If you look at these stats a little closer, 63% drops to 45% when the option of having life imprisonment without the chance of parole is introduced.

Of course they have a higher poverty rate. I'm not arguing that point with you but believe it or not 2 parent families can also live in poverty. Let's focus on addressing the children who are living in poverty by giving them a good start in life equal to advantaged children.

Of course they have a higher poverty rate. I'm not arguing that point with you but believe it or not 2 parent families can also live in poverty. Let's focus on addressing the children who are living in poverty by giving them a good start in life equal to advantaged children.

A 2 parent family could just as easily be living in poverty as a 1 parent family. Why not focus on reality instead?

This is why we vote for competent politicians and economists to figure this out for us. Seriously, you want me to come up with a federal budget?

He/she just likes to troll my posts. At least I'm getting some kind of a reaction.

When are some people going to realize that single parent families are not going away. They are here to stay. A good education starts with a creative and stimulating environment which is not easily accessible for children living in poverty who are not yet of school age. Providing free ece for these children will go a long way to prevent this cycle of poverty and will contribute to a future healthy economy.

Mulcair has agreed to a debate that includes women's issues. We can be sure Harper won't participate in that one given his track record with women.

Tell that to the close to 2000 men who could use this surgery but may not be s me to afford it? You add in their partners that comes to 4000 Canadians being treated unfairly on an annual basis with this gender bias. Thanks for trying to dismiss this as a non issue.

An enriched environment for children will lead to an increase in brain size. Hence the need for proper nutrition and stimulating activities.