I don't think companies would want employees who are likely to harass other employees, as that can lead to reduced productivity and potentially even to lawsuits.

Typically unsaid code but certain people are avoided for just that reason.
Think on it safe bet or dangerous bet?

If person is nasty at work ... and so is everyone else? No one cares... and if you need to fire them you got easy excuse they can't do anything about.

Only time ... we will say xemales are hired is when no other choice by law. They work less , complain more and cost company more.

If xemales were such great employees they would be hired over males

doesn't that make sense?
Companies bottom line is MONEY

True indeed. And that is why companies often reject people with careers such as "gender studies" or "queer studies". You see, you don't want someone who will pester you over their personal life style.

TinyE be blocking folk. That's rich. You don't live in an echo chamber so much as a particle accelerator.

I HAD TOO!!! :P

I'd log on and there would be twenty messages for me, all nonsensical rants. :P It wasn't what he was PMing but the fact that he was ALWAYS PMing. I'd clear off the twenty lines, take a ten minute break, and there were twenty more lines.

That's funny, I only usually get 1 or 2 PMs a month (nearly always friendly chats). Ever thought that maybe... just maybe it's not them? Maybe it's you.

Mirrors, Tiny. They're used for more than just personal hygiene.

I never get any PMs...where is the love? lol

I usually only got one or two a month until him and ciaomalau showed up. For all the shit we give those two, they are remarkably fast typists. :P

I guess not thinking about what you're writing speeds up the process.

I think it only proves the point that your ideal, or maybe de facto subsrciped, judiciary is different from mine.

This age 9 condemnation is truly the case for Mexico? If so, which sort of crimes, pray tell?

My stance is based on the Finnish judiciary, which I do not reject perso. I find it generally just, and fair.

Less than 15 years of age goes to children's services by default, but young perpetrators are liable to pay for damages. Just today I read of two 13 year olds whom spoilt enivorment by stealing oil canisters and spilling the oil. They will have to pay damages for the clean up.

Over 15 years but not adult will have lesser scale of punishmnet, but will still be liable.

At eigteen, persons are supposed to be wised-up, for the main.


I am intreagued by this crime at nine years - do tell us what it is!

Unfortunately it is not the case of Mexico. Quite the contrary, below 15 you may get away with nearly any fucked up thing. But, in more civilized countries such as USA, if the case requires it, such as murder, a minor from 9 years onward might be judged as an adult given the severity of the crime. Of course it is a case specific thing. And that is not the only country with such laws.

I then hope it does not bother you that I ask you: which Mexican 9-year olds are so depraved, and which are their crimes, for you to ignore the concept of adulthood?

I do get larceny of 13 year olds, etc - as was the case just now in Finland. The financial consequence means parental cencor.

But you said Mexico justice sees no difference between a nine or eigtheen year old. Link it, please - or u just wanted "hard justice" thing?

If you are old enough to do the crime you are old enough to pay for it.

So you think a 5 year old that kills someone should get life without parole and or the chair?

a 5 year old that murders someone clearly as issues and most likely could never be reform to society. It is a sad reality, but sending him to juvenile hall for years probably wont teach him a lesson, as he would be lacking good education and associating with good people around his age. So yes a child should be send to jail to life or executed if he kills some one on purpose,