"Santa Fe shooting suspect reportedly killed girl who turned down his advances"
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/388486-santa-fe-shooter-killed-girl-who-turned-down-his-advances

Although there is no evidence thus far that the Santa Fe shooter identified with Incels or any such group, the reality is that there are many people who think like Incels. They cannot make sense of rejection and some resort to murder.

Where are the sanctions on trade? Where are the embargoes? Where are the actual repercussions outside of lip service? It is hard to take their condemnation of Israel and the US actions seriously when there are no repercussions which are within their powers.

Global protests grow after Israeli killing of Palestinian demonstrators

International condemnation of Israel’s killing of 60 Palestinian protesters in Gaza has escalated as tens of thousands of people rallied in the coastal enclave to bury the dead.

The killings took place on Monday during demonstrations at the Gaza border fence, which coincided with a high-profile ceremony to mark the transfer of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which overturned decades of US foreign policy.

The UK prime minister, Theresa May, was among those who spoke out strongly on Tuesday. A spokesman said she was “deeply troubled” by Israel’s use of live fire and “the scale of the violence”.

On Tuesday Palestinians marked the Nakba, or “catastrophe”, commemorating the more than 700,000 Palestinians who fled or were expelled in the 1948 war surrounding Israel’s creation.

Senior UN officials condemned the recent killings as an “outrageous human rights violation” and said it appeared that anyone approaching the Gaza border fence was liable to be killed by Israeli soldiers. Ireland summoned Israel’s ambassador to protest against the fatalities. Russia and China also expressed their concern over the killings.

But any prospect of the US allowing an investigation under the aegis of the Security Council seemed remote after the American ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, threw Washington’s weight behind Israel, saying no country would show the “restraint” that Israel had.

Most of the Gazans who died on Monday were shot by Israeli snipers, Gaza’s health ministry said. According to the Hamas-run ministry, the dead included eight children under the age of 16. At least 2,400 people were wounded.

Summing up the concern of many, Rupert Colville, a spokesman for the UN high commissioner for human rights, said in Geneva: “The mere fact of approaching a fence is not a lethal, life-threatening act, so that does not warrant being shot. It seems that anyone is liable to be shot dead.” He stressed that international laws that applied to Israel made clear that “lethal force may only be used as a measure of last, not first, resort.”

In an apparent dismissal of Israel’s justification for the high casualty levels, Colville said: “It is not acceptable to say that ‘this is Hamas and therefore this is OK.”

Israel has accused Hamas, the Islamist group that controls Gaza, of being behind the protests and said it was merely defending its territory.

The UN’s high commissioner for human rights, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, said: “Those responsible for outrageous human rights violations must be held to account.” The World Health Organisation also intervened, saying the scale of the injuries was threatening to overwhelm Gaza’s already beleaguered health system.


Citing figures from the Gazan health ministry and a group of aid agencies, a WHO official, Mahmoud Daher, told the Associated Press that 2,771 people were wounded during Monday’s unrest. Of those, 1,360 were wounded by live fire, 400 by shrapnel and 980 were suffering from gas inhalation. He said the majority of those wounded by live fire were struck in their lower limbs.

As the burials of the dead got under way on Tuesday, a senior Hamas official, Khalil al-Hayya, vowed that the protests in Gaza would continue, while on the West Bank the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, declared a general strike on Tuesday after accusing Israel of “massacres”.

The scenes of lethal violence on Monday were placed side by side on the front pages of many of the world’s newspapers with images from the glossy inauguration of Washington’s new mission about 60 miles away in an affluent Jerusalem neighbourhood. Donald Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, celebrated the opening to clapping and cheering from American and Israeli VIPs.

Critics of the embassy move, which the US president hailed as a “great day” for Israel, said the optics of Monday’s embassy opening and the Gaza deaths would damage Washington’s stature as a mediator between those parties and could have unpredictable consequences.

“Traditionally, we’ve tried to play a role of fireman in the Middle East. Now we’re playing the role of arsonist,” said Ilan Goldenberg, a former state department and Pentagon official who runs the Middle East program at the Center for a New American Security.

Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, joined the US in blaming Hamas for the deaths at the border. He defended his country’s use of force, saying: “Every country has the obligation to defend its borders.”

The French president, Emmanuel Macron, said he condemned “the violence of the Israeli armed forces against protesters” in a telephone call withAbbas and Jordan’s King Abdullah II. He reaffirmed his criticism of the US decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem.

Anger at Trump’s December declaration on the embassy helped to ignite the six-week protest movement. To international condemnation, Israeli snipers have regularly fired on demonstrators during past rallies.

Trump’s decision to move the embassy and to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel dismayed Palestinians, who see East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. The holy city has been one of the most contentious issues in past negotiations, and broad international consensus has been that its status will be settled under a peace deal, although Trump has said Jerusalem is now “off the table”.

Many Israelis have praised the decision to move the diplomatic mission. The Friends of Zion Museum has put up posters in Jerusalem saying: “Make Israel Great Again”, and US flags have been hung from buildings in the city.

I thought that she did not take the time to think; she went into an extreme protest too quickly. If she did not have a body that was considered mainstream she may have thought out and presented a meaningful argument to the professor without resorting to stripping. These females who want to dominate the women’s rights movement are most times ill-equipped to conduct themselves in a manner that leaves room for others in that they take the sting out of other forms of protest that could have been used more wisely. They want all the limelight and have no qualms about what they do to achieve it.

I would really like to know whether males presented in shorts in the past. I agree that people should feel free to dress how they want. However, some institutions have rules or convention that govern how people dress for certain functions; if people choose to protest them then that is fine also.

If it is customary that people dress a certain way to attend certain functions, then if one goes against the usual protocol, one could be challenged and even be asked to conform. One is not bound to comply or respond but should be able to explain one’s position.  Going against convention can be distracting, but one also has the right to do so except where it is reasonably forbidden. If people are making ill-informed comments without malice, then that could be addressed through discussions.

By default, many people are racist and sexist and even if someone may be informed about feminism, they may be blind to racism, colorism, sizeism and ageism, and they may also harbour Eurocentric perceptions of beauty. If they are white or light skin they may be unaware of how privilege allows them to behave as they want and still be accepted.

A white or light skin girl who is considered attractive can easily resort to stripping in protest and if she does so there is no shame on her because her body-type is preferred. People easily buy her version of events and so it goes. From a privileged position, she could really be arrogant and be protesting, "How dare you tell me what I can or cannot do?"  and this is embraced as empowerment.

If I see a female walking along a dangerous lonely street at night, I might tell her that she may be better off walking on another street as she could face attack by males who are up to no good. She could argue, “It is my right as a woman to walk anywhere I wish and dress anyhow I want. Why don’t you tell those males to behave?” Sure, she is 100% correct, but that does not automatically mean that I am wrong either. Getting criminal males to change their behaviour takes more time than it would be to address the immediacy of the danger that she could be in. Thus, she can either try to be flexible in her judgement and see another point of view or be right and face the possible consequences.

I viewed the video of the protest and I was less than impressed. While the young female is free to express herself as she chooses and while I agree that female bodies, more so than males, have been overly sexualised and shamed, the convention for presenting a lecture or seminar is business attire. For her lecturer to advise her of such was by no means crossing boundaries. However, the lecturer's reasoning for advising her against her attire was flawed; if she was more sensible, she could have better articulated another position. It is true that the short-pants wearing, or otherwise revealing attire would attract the straight male gaze. It is also true that regardless such does not warrant male abuse. Still, I agree that her choice of clothing in this situation was inappropriate. I also do not think that in this instance it was the most effective form of protest.

Many so-called feminists do disservice to the movement by claiming prejudice or injustice where there is none. The #metoo movement is one such example where feminist extremism prevails. Many males (some deserving) have received condemnation without a fair hearing. Although I may be wrong about the lack of judgement on the part of this female, as I was not privy to what the university lecturer actually said, I suspect that she read the lecturer wrong. This situation also points to the general character of modern-day feminism as well as the LGBTQIA movement which is to silence people who disagree with their stance. So, her response to a simple observation or a difference of perspective was to protest. Her right to do so, I fully agree but it was a protest in vain in my view.

I could see where both persons believe they have a point.

I agree with the student that how you dress should be up to you entirely. But, if you are doing a presentation ideally you would want your views to be weighed seriously and how you dress could be an unwanted distraction from the points at hand.  Also, though it was a mock presentation you would want to put your best there as well.

Further, if there is a disagreement in an environment that allows you to have a say or open discussion why not see it through instead of storming out, venting and getting others to go along with you. I think that's a form of cowardice as the student  could not stand alone (right there and then) and fight her battle.

Back to the issue at hand. I don't think the professor is wrong for  asking her about how her mother would feel, in a context.

Also her stripping down was not about her presentation but came across more like an ego.

I also wanted to add a side note in response to their "perception of men" comment.

Males WILL be looking at your body...is this even a question?

Plus, her body is within the acceptable realm. This could add to her comfort of displaying it.

I did have a reasoning with someone about this issue. I agree there are similarities between Makini's hair situation and this students dress code. Also, I think the professor's opinion on how the student should dress is rooted in flawed notions of respectability and morality and student protesting it is displaying that she does hold those views. In my reasoning with the individual noted it is the professor's right to give that opinion and the students right to protest it and I agree. I saw that opinion as a part of policing women's bodies. That opinion was about sexism and with Makini her colleague's opinion was about racism.

The reasons the lecturer gave -distracting males- and the student -morality- continue to be ways to police the female body. Why should females dress to make males and other females comfortable if they themselves are comfortable and know the work they are presenting. I do however think attire choice should reflect the seriousness of the space and denim shorts does not first come to mind. However, the perception of seriousness is so vague, abstract, and can be very Eurocentric/Victorian/pedantic. Distraction in a general sense should be a consideration like wearing “gogo” lights on your head may be one person's idea of distraction or denim shorts another.  It would be interesting to hear the follow up given that she deleted the fb post.

Interestingly, the department where I currently study is trying to address such issues. I’ve seen Beyonce in tour wear in presentations about antibiotics resistance and puppy pictures come across screens during presentations...which has been somewhat a mockery the way they were included. But more to do with attire, last week a student who wears very dark shades was asked by her supervisor for them to be removed during her proposal seminar. I was not there but the teacher's argument was professionalism and the student's argument was "I’ve worn it in exams with no issue"...it definitely stirred up against the student who along with two siblings are seen as troublesome and arrogant.

Finally, the guidelines about attire can be very subjective. An east Indian accountant suggested before my proposal seminar, a few years ago that I should not wear an afro ...but I did. I saw on her face that it made her uncomfortable that I did not take her unsolicited advice. The same supervisor who told the student about the sunglasses once said in the kitchen in an open discussion that an afro is not a professional hairstyle. Also, many may think its "distracting", so these are good conversations to have about body image, identity and freedom of expression.