MLK-Do something Topeka! ~ONE~
MSNBC ON FRAUDCLOSURE: NO MENTION OF REMIC OR MERS. 10-7-2010
Class Action Lawsuit - MSNBC ON FRAUDCLOSURE: NO MENTION OF REMIC OR MERS. 10-7-2010
Do you know about - MSNBC ON FRAUDCLOSURE: NO MENTION OF REMIC OR MERS. 10-7-2010
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for home elevators that need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is MSNBC ON FRAUDCLOSURE: NO MENTION OF REMIC OR MERS. 10-7-2010
MSNBC ON FRAUDCLOSURE: NO MENTION OF REMIC OR MERS. 10-7-2010 Tube. Duration : 11.33 Mins.Emotional Abuse - Why Marriage Counseling Makes it Worse
Class Action - Emotional Abuse - Why Marriage Counseling Makes it Worse
Good afternoon. Now, I found out about Class Action - Emotional Abuse - Why Marriage Counseling Makes it Worse. Which is very helpful in my opinion and you. Emotional Abuse - Why Marriage Counseling Makes it WorseIf you live with a resentful, angry, or emotional abusive person, you have most likely have already tried marriage counseling or individual psychotherapy. You may have tried sending your partner to some kind of anger-management group. Let me guess your experience: Your personal psychotherapy did not help your relationship, marriage counseling made it worse, your partner's psychotherapy made it still worse, and his anger-management or abuser classes lowered the tone but not the lasting blame of his resentment, anger, or abuse.
What I said. It shouldn't be in conclusion that the true about Class Action. You look at this article for info on an individual need to know is Class Action.Class Action
Fortunately, you can learn something about healing from each one of these failed treatments, which we will search for next, one by one.
Why Marriage Counseling Fails
By the time most of my clients come to see me, they have already been to at least three marriage counselors, commonly with disastrous results. A major imagine for their dissatisfaction is that marriage counseling presupposes that both parties have the skill to regulate guilt, shame, and feelings of inadequacy without blaming them on one another. If your husband could reflect on the motivations of his behavior - what within him makes him act as he does-he might then disagree with you or feel he can't enumerate with you or feel incompatible with you for any amount of reasons, but he wouldn't yell, ignore, avoid, devalue, or dismiss you in the process. If your husband were able to regulate his own emotions, your marriage counseling might have been successful.
Another charge against marriage counseling is manifest in an old joke among marriage therapists: We all have skid marks at the door where the husband is being dragged in. As you well know, men do not go voluntarily to therapy as a rule. So therapists tend to go out of their way to engage the man because he is 10 times more likely to drop out than his wife. If the therapist is sufficiently skilled, this extra effort to keep the man engaged isn't a problem, in general relationships. But in walking-on-eggshells relationships it can be disastrous, because the therapist unwittingly joins with the more resentful, angry, or abusive partner in trying to shape out who is to blame in a given complaint. Of course he or she won't use the word, "blame." Most marriage counselors are fascinating and well-meaning and certainly want to make things better. So they will couch their interventions in terms of what has to be done to decide the dispute, rather than who is to blame. Here's an example of how they go wrong.
Therapist: Estelle, it seems that Gary gets angry when he feels judged.
Gary: That's right. I get judged about everything.
Therapist: (to Estelle) I'm not saying that you are judging him-
Gary: (interrupting) Oh yes she is. It's her hobby.
Therapist: (to Estelle) I'm saying that he feels judged.
Perhaps if your request could be put in such a way that he wouldn't feel judged, you would get a better reaction.
Estelle: How do I do that?
Therapist: I noticed that when you ask him for something, you focus on what he's doing wrong. You also use the word "you" a lot. Suppose you framed it like this. "Gary, I would like it if we could spend five minutes when we get home just talking to each other about our day." (to Gary) Would you feel judged if she put it like that?
Gary: Not at all. But I doubt that she could get the judgment out of her tone of voice. She doesn't know how to talk any other way.
Therapist: Sure she does. (to Estelle) You can say it without judgment in your voice, can't you?
Estelle: Yes, of course I can. I don't mean to be judgmental all the time.
Therapist: Why don't we laid out it a few times?
So now the qoute isn't Gary's sense of inadequacy or his addiction to blame or his abusiveness, it's Estelle's judgmental tone of voice. With this crucial shift in perspective introduced by the therapist, Estelle rehearsed her new approach. Gary responded certainly to her efforts, while the therapist was there to contain his emotional reactivity. Of course at home, it was quite other matter, despite their hours of practice in the therapist's office.
In a less reactive relationship, the therapist's guidance wouldn't be so bad. It's questionable either it would help, but it wouldn't do any harm. If Gary could regulate his emotions, he might have appreciated Estelle's efforts to think him in the way she phrased her requests; maybe he would have come to be more empathic. But in the day-to-day reality of this walking-on-eggshells relationship, Gary felt guilty when Estelle made greater efforts to appease him. Predictably, he blamed it all on her -- she wasn't doing it right, her "I-statements" had an fundamental accusatory tone, and she was trying to make him look bad.
By the way, explore shows that therapists behave in their own relationships pretty much the same way that you do. In disagreements with their spouses, they fail just as much as you in trying to use the "communication-validation" techniques they make you do in their offices. They find it as tough as you and your husband do to put on the brakes when their own emotions and instinct to blame are going full throttle. After all, how is Mr. Hyde supposed to remember what Dr. Jeckyl learned in marriage counseling?
One favorite marriage therapist and author has written that women in abusive marriages have to learn to set boundaries. "She needs to learn skills to make her message - 'I will not tolerate this behavior any longer' - heard. [The] hurt someone [must] learn how to set boundaries that certainly mean something." This is the therapeutic equivalent of a judge dismissing your law suit against vandals because you failed to put up a "Do not vandalize" sign. You have to wonder if this therapist puts post-its on valued objects in her office that clearly state, "Do not steal!"
Putting aside the harmful, inaccurate implication that women are abused because they don't have the "skill to set boundaries," this kind of intervention fully misses the point. Your husband's resentment, anger, or abuse comes from his substitution of power for value. It has nothing to do with the way you set boundaries or with what you argue about. It has to do with his violation of his deepest values. As we'll see in the chapter on removing the thorns from your heart, you will be protected, not by setting certain boundaries that he won't respect, but by reintegrating your deepest values into your daily sense of self. When you no longer internalize the distorted image of yourself that your husband reflects back to you, your husband will clearly understand that he has to convert the way he treats you if he wants to save the marriage.
One of the reasons marriage therapy fails to help walking-on-eggshells relationships is that it relies on egalitarian principles. Noble an idea as it is, this arrival can only work in a connection in which the couple sees each other as equals. Remember, your husband feels that you operate his painful emotions and, therefore, feels entitled to use resentment, anger, or abuse as a defense against you. He will resist any effort to take away what he perceives to be his only defense with every tool of manipulation and avoidance he can muster. In other words, he is unlikely to give up his "edge" of moral superiority - he's right, you're wrong - for the give-and-take process required of couples' therapy. And should the therapist even remotely appear to "side" with you on any issue, the whole process will be dismissed as "sexist psychobabble."
Many men blame their wives on the way home from the therapist's office for bringing up threatening or embarrassing things in the session. Two couples I know were seriously injured in car crashes that resulted from arguments on the way home from appointments with therapists they worked with before I met them. I'm willing to bet that if you've tried marriage counseling, you've had a few chilly, argumentative, or abusive rides home from the sessions.
The trap that many marriage counselors fall into (taking you with them) is that resentment - the foundation of anger and abuse - can seem like a connection issue. "I resent that you left your towel on the bathroom floor, because it makes me feel disregarded, like my father used to make me feel." But as we have seen, the traditional purpose of resentment is to protect the vulnerability you feel (or he feels) from your low levels of core value. Please be sure you get this point: Low core value is not a connection issue. You each have to regulate your own core value before you can begin to negotiate about behavior. In other words, if self-value depends on the negotiation, you can't make true behavior requests - if your "request" isn't met, you will retaliate with some sort of emotional punishment: "If you don't do this, I'll make you feel guilty (or worse)." Merely teaching the couple to phrase things differently reinforces the false and damaging understanding that your partner is responsible for your core value and vice versa.
Many women live with resentful, angry, or abusive men who seem to the rest of the world to be "charmers." I've had cabinet secretaries, billionaires, movie stars, and Tv celebrities for clients, all of whom could charm the fur off a cat, in public. Before they were referred to me, each one of these guys had been championed by marriage counselors who complete that their wives were unreasonable, hysterical, or even abusive. They have no trouble at all playing the sensitive, caring husband in therapy. But in the privacy of their homes they sulk, belittle, demean, and even batter with the worst of them.
These men have gotten so good at charming the public, including their marriage counselors, because they've had lots of practice. Since they were young children, they've used charm and public skills to avoid and cover up a monumental range of core hurts. Though it can be an efficient strategy in public contexts, this masquerade falls flat on its face in an intimate one. If your husband is a charmer in public, his resentment, anger, or abuse at home is designed to keep you from getting close sufficient to see how inadequate and unlovable he certainly feels. In fooling the marriage advisor and the public at large, he makes a fool of you but an even bigger one of himself.
Why Your Psychotherapy Did Not Help Your connection and His Made It Worse
Research and clinical contact show that women in therapy tend to sustain prominent details about their walking-on-eggshells relationships. Most say that they're embarrassed to be fully honest with their therapists. One woman told me that she was convinced that her therapist, whom she understanding was "awesome," wouldn't like her if she knew about the harsh emotional abuse at home. Though it is incredibly hard to believe, she saw that same therapist for five years without ever mentioning her husband's severe problems with anger and abuse. By the time I was called in, the woman was suffering from acute depression and anxiety that were destroying her corporeal health. When I spoke to the therapist, however, she had no clue about the abuse.
When therapists are aware that their clients are walking on eggshells at home, they feel approximately bound to persuade the woman to leave the relationship. The most frequent complaint I hear from women who have undergone this kind of advocacy therapy is that they were reluctant to enumerate the depth of their guilt, shame, and fear of abandonment to their disapproving therapists. Some have reported that their counselors would say things like, "After all he did to you, and you feel guilty?" I have heard hundreds of women article this kind of pressure from their therapists and have heard hundreds of therapists at conferences express exasperation about their clients' reluctance to leave their walking-on-eggshells relationships. The trainings I do for therapists worldwide always emphasize the utter necessity of compassion for their clients' big burden of guilt. Manufacture hurt women feel ashamed of their natural (albeit irrational) feelings of guilt is intolerably bad practice. Compassion for her core hurts is the wholesome way to help her heal her pain.
Despite these problems, your psychotherapy probably helped you a little, even though it did not help your relationship. either it helped your husband is other matter.
The goal of traditional psychotherapy is to reprocess painful contact in the hope of changing the way the client sees himself and his loved ones. If your husband's therapy unearthed painful contact from his past, without first teaching him basic emotional self-regulation, he most likely dealt with that pain in the only way he knew how -- by taking it out on you. He either seemed more entitled to display resentful, angry, or abusive behavior or used the pain of his past as an excuse for it. Here are the sort of things women hear from resentful, angry, or abusive men who are in therapy:
"With all I've had to put up with, don't you hassle me, too!"
"It's so hard being me, I shouldn't have to put with your crap, too!"
"I know I was mean to you, but with the pain I've suffered, you have to cut me some slack."
In defense of your husband's therapist, this arrival is designed to make him more empathic to you eventually. But it takes a long time - a great many weekly one-hour sessions - before his sense of entitlement gives way to an appreciation of your feelings. And once he reaches that point, he has to deal with the guilt of how he's treated you in his "pre-empathic" years. For at least a few more months of slow-acting therapy, he'll feel guilty every time he looks at you. Without the skills offered in the Boot Camp section of this book, he'll either lash out at you for Manufacture him feel guilty or distance himself from the wrongly perceived source of his pain - you.
As we've already seen, marriage counselors have to make special efforts to build a working alliance with reluctant male clients. That formidable task is all the harder in the more intimate context of individual psychotherapy with a man who dreads exposing vulnerability, as just about all resentful, angry, or abusive men do. To design and foster this tenuous alliance, therapists will often employ a technique called "joining." He or she may validate your husband's feelings about your behavior, both for the sake of the therapeutic alliance and out of fear that he'll drop out of therapy, as most men do before Manufacture any real progress. Your resentful, angry, or abusive husband will likely justify the best "joining" efforts of his therapist as reinforcement that he has been mostly right all along and you have been mostly wrong. To make matters worse, most therapists have a bias to believe what their clients tell them, even when they know that they're getting only half the story and a distorted half at that. This is a bit hard to swallow when you think that many resentful, angry, or abusive men make their wives sound like Norman Bates's mother -- they're just minding their own business, when she comes screaming out of nowhere wielding a bloody knife.
If you were lucky sufficient to enumerate with your husband's therapist - and that's something that most resentful, angry, or abusive men will not allow - you probably heard things like this.
"He's certainly trying, give him prestige for that."
"As you know, he has so many issues to work through."
"We're beginning to chip away at the denial."
The message to you is always, "Continue to walk on eggshells and hope that he comes around."
Why Anger-Management Didn't Work
Research shows that anger-management programs sometimes furnish short-term gains, and that these all but disappear when follow-up is done a year or so later. That was approximately certainly your contact if your husband took an anger-management class. They are especially ineffective with men whose wives have to walk on eggshells.
The worst kind of anger-management class teaches men to "get in touch with their anger" and to "get it out." The assumption here is that emotions are like 19th century steam engines that need to "let off steam" on a regular basis. These kinds of classes contain things like punching bags and using foam baseball bats to club imaginary adversaries. (Guess who would be the imaginary victim of your husband's foam-softened clubbing?) Many studies have shown conclusively that this arrival certainly makes habitancy angrier and more hostile, not to mention more entitled to act out their anger. Participants are training their brains to connect controlled aggression with anger. Could the designers of these programs certainly think women would be pleased that their men learned in anger-management class to dream about punching them with a foam bat?
Of course, there is a much better alternative to both "holding it in" and "getting it out." In the Boot Camp section of this book, your husband will learn to replace resentment, anger, and abusive impulses, with compassion for you.
Hopefully, your husband did not attend one of these discredited classes on anger expression. But you might not have been so lucky when it came to the second worse form of anger-management: "desensitization." In that kind of class your husband would mention your behaviors that "push his buttons," things like you "nagging" him. The instructor would then work to make those behaviors seem less "provocative" to him. The techniques contain things like ignoring it, avoiding it, or pretending it's funny. Didn't you always dream that one day your husband would learn to be less angry by ignoring you and avoiding you or reasoning that you're funny when you ask him about something serious?
Core hurts -- not specific behaviors -- trigger anger. If the class succeeds in Manufacture your husband less sensitive to you "nagging" him, he will nevertheless get irritable when you tell him you love him, as that will stir his guilt and inadequacy. Most important, you don't want him to come to be less sensitive to core hurts. Quite the opposite, as he becomes more sensitive to them, he will be more sensitive to you, provided that he learns how to regulate his feelings of inadequacy by showing compassion and love for you, which the Boot Camp section will help him to do.
Desensitizing doesn't work at all on resentment, which is the precursor to most displays of anger. Resentment is not plainly a reflexive response to a specific event, to something you say or do. Resentment arouses the whole nervous ideas and works like a defensive ideas itself. That's why you don't resent just one or two or two hundred things. When you're resentful, you are enduringly scanning the environment for any possible bad news, lest it sneak up on you. Anger-management classes try to deal with this constant level of arousal with techniques to conduct it, that is, to keep your husband from getting so upset that he feels compelled to act out his anger. "Don't make it worse," is the motto of most anger-management classes. If he was aggressive they taught him to withdraw. If he shut down, they taught him to be more assertive. What they didn't teach him was how to stop blaming his core hurts on you and act agreeing to his own deeper values. If attempts to conduct anger don't appeal to core values, resentful men begin to feel like they're "swallowing it," or "going along to avoid an argument." This erodes their self-esteem and justifies, in their minds, occasional blow ups: "I am sick and tired of putting up with your crap!" Then they can feel self-righteous: "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
In a love relationship, managing anger is not the point. You need to promote compassion, which is the only reliable prevention of resentment, anger, and abuse.
I hope you receive new knowledge about Class Action. Where you can offer use within your evryday life. And most significantly, your reaction is passed about Class Action.The supervene Of Regression In Speed Reading!
Class Action - The supervene Of Regression In Speed Reading!
Good afternoon. Yesterday, I learned all about Class Action - The supervene Of Regression In Speed Reading!. Which is very helpful if you ask me so you. The supervene Of Regression In Speed Reading!Regression is the backward movement of the eyes over data that it has previously considered. As the name sounds, it regresses or slows down the pace of reading. However, to some speed readers, it helps in comprehension of read passages. It is the opposite of progressive reading.
What I said. It isn't the final outcome that the actual about Class Action. You check out this article for info on what you wish to know is Class Action.Class Action
Speed reading have a lot of reading techniques that every prospective speed reader should embrace to fully implement to the advancement of speed reading. Many speed reading experts do not propose that regression of any kind be employed in speed reading, but the fact is regression helps comprehension for some population who are just starting out speed reading. Even some experts at times regresses to catch up on some words or expression then progresses.
While i personally will not propose regression while reading, there is nothing wrong if one goes back temporarily on a word he is not clear about. I will propose that to make speed reading effective, it is good you cease your material first then you can go back to those words you are not clear about and try to search meaning to each of them.
Below is an example of how regression is made in speed reading.
Progressive reader:
--> --> --> --> --> --> -->The bullet hit the door at once.
Regressive reader:
The --> --> hit --> --> at once
A closer look at the two scenario shows that the progressive speed reader was more in control of his comprehension than the regressive reader. The regressive reader's style slows his comprehension and also slows down his speed rate thus manufacture reading the sentence slow and more difficult to understand.
From the foregoing, you will observation that anything who has the believe that regression improves the rate of reading is entirely misled. Because speed and comprehension which are the fundamentals of speed reading is entirely defeated. Therefore, if you have ever used or opinion of using regression to speed read, it is good you work on your skills to move you from a regressive reader to a progressive reader, that way you will be able to specialist the considerable reading skills.
For every time gained in speed reading by a progressive reader, there is a corresponding loss in time by the regressive reader. So be sure to institution speed reading by becoming a progressive reader.
I hope you will get new knowledge about Class Action. Where you may offer utilization in your daily life. And most significantly, your reaction is passed about Class Action.El-P - Delorean - Fantastic Damage - 2002
Class Action Lawsuit - El-P - Delorean - Fantastic Damage - 2002
Do you know about - El-P - Delorean - Fantastic Damage - 2002
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for information on anyone wish to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is El-P - Delorean - Fantastic Damage - 2002
El-P - Delorean - Fantastic Damage - 2002 Video Clips. Duration : 5.58 Mins.Scientology soon to be Busted for Fraud
Class Action Lawsuit - Scientology soon to be Busted for Fraud
Do you know about - Scientology soon to be Busted for Fraud
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check this out article for information on an individual need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Scientology soon to be Busted for Fraud
Scientology soon to be Busted for Fraud Video Clips. Duration : 10.02 Mins.Class of 2011 Senior Prank - Oregon High School
Class Action Lawsuit - Class of 2011 Senior Prank - Oregon High School
Do you know about - Class of 2011 Senior Prank - Oregon High School
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check this out article for home elevators anyone want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Class of 2011 Senior Prank - Oregon High School
Class of 2011 Senior Prank - Oregon High School Tube. Duration : 5.17 Mins.LG French door fridge is worthless
Class Action Lawsuit - LG French door fridge is worthless
Do you know about - LG French door fridge is worthless
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You read this article for home elevators a person need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is LG French door fridge is worthless
LG French door fridge is worthless Video Clips. Duration : 1.38 Mins.Michael Reagan versus Operation Northwoods
Class Action Lawsuit - Michael Reagan versus Operation Northwoods
Do you know about - Michael Reagan versus Operation Northwoods
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You look at this article for facts about an individual need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Michael Reagan versus Operation Northwoods
Michael Reagan versus Operation Northwoods Video Clips. Duration : 6.75 Mins.Model of snow blower in action
Class Action Lawsuit - Model of snow blower in action
Do you know about - Model of snow blower in action
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You look at this article for information on that want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Model of snow blower in action
Model of snow blower in action Video Clips. Duration : 4.63 Mins.How to fix AMANA BX21VW Refrigerator
Class Action Lawsuit - How to fix AMANA BX21VW Refrigerator
Do you know about - How to fix AMANA BX21VW Refrigerator
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for info on an individual need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is How to fix AMANA BX21VW Refrigerator
How to fix AMANA BX21VW Refrigerator Video Clips. Duration : 9.87 Mins.Google Books Settlement Agreement with Authors and Publishers
Class Action Lawsuit - Google Books Settlement Agreement with Authors and Publishers
Do you know about - Google Books Settlement Agreement with Authors and Publishers
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for information on an individual need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Google Books Settlement Agreement with Authors and Publishers
Google Books Settlement Agreement with Authors and Publishers Tube. Duration : 5.07 Mins.Kudlow&Company: Liberty Dollar founder interviewed 11/20/07
Class Action Lawsuit - Kudlow&Company: Liberty Dollar founder interviewed 11/20/07
Do you know about - Kudlow&Company: Liberty Dollar founder interviewed 11/20/07
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the real about Class Action Lawsuit. You check out this article for home elevators anyone need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Kudlow&Company: Liberty Dollar founder interviewed 11/20/07
Kudlow&Company: Liberty Dollar founder interviewed 11/20/07 Tube. Duration : 5.58 Mins.Gugatan terhadap janji Pemimpin.flv
Class Action Lawsuit - Gugatan terhadap janji Pemimpin.flv
Do you know about - Gugatan terhadap janji Pemimpin.flv
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the real about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for info on anyone need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Gugatan terhadap janji Pemimpin.flv
Gugatan terhadap janji Pemimpin.flv Video Clips. Duration : 8.47 Mins.PSN Store Date | Giveaway Winners
Class Action Lawsuit - PSN Store Date | Giveaway Winners
Do you know about - PSN Store Date | Giveaway Winners
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check this out article for info on anyone want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is PSN Store Date | Giveaway Winners
PSN Store Date | Giveaway Winners Tube. Duration : 3.75 Mins.Homeless Veterans pt2
Class Action Lawsuit - Homeless Veterans pt2
Do you know about - Homeless Veterans pt2
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the real about Class Action Lawsuit. You check this out article for facts about an individual want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Homeless Veterans pt2
Homeless Veterans pt2 Tube. Duration : 8.38 Mins.MERS Foreclosure Fraud - Stopping Foreclosures Update 10/9/10
Class Action Lawsuit - MERS Foreclosure Fraud - Stopping Foreclosures Update 10/9/10
Do you know about - MERS Foreclosure Fraud - Stopping Foreclosures Update 10/9/10
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You look at this article for facts about a person want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is MERS Foreclosure Fraud - Stopping Foreclosures Update 10/9/10
MERS Foreclosure Fraud - Stopping Foreclosures Update 10/9/10 Tube. Duration : 5.40 Mins.KIDOR reaL k1d0r In AcTioN BeST Cs MoVie :X
Class Action Lawsuit - KIDOR reaL k1d0r In AcTioN BeST Cs MoVie :X
Do you know about - KIDOR reaL k1d0r In AcTioN BeST Cs MoVie :X
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You look at this article for home elevators an individual need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is KIDOR reaL k1d0r In AcTioN BeST Cs MoVie :X
KIDOR reaL k1d0r In AcTioN BeST Cs MoVie :X Video Clips. Duration : 6.20 Mins.Elouise Cobell - Keynote Address
Class Action Lawsuit - Elouise Cobell - Keynote Address
Do you know about - Elouise Cobell - Keynote Address
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the real about Class Action Lawsuit. You read this article for information on a person need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Elouise Cobell - Keynote Address
Elouise Cobell - Keynote Address Video Clips. Duration : 56.47 Mins.2 US Judges Plead guilty to selling children to private prisons!
Class Action Lawsuit - 2 US Judges Plead guilty to selling children to private prisons!
Do you know about - 2 US Judges Plead guilty to selling children to private prisons!
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You read this article for information about an individual want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is 2 US Judges Plead guilty to selling children to private prisons!
2 US Judges Plead guilty to selling children to private prisons! Video Clips. Duration : 10.65 Mins.Women of the Year 2006 - Merikay McLeod
Class Action Lawsuit - Women of the Year 2006 - Merikay McLeod
Do you know about - Women of the Year 2006 - Merikay McLeod
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the real about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for info on that want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Women of the Year 2006 - Merikay McLeod
Women of the Year 2006 - Merikay McLeod Video Clips. Duration : 10.77 Mins.Gateway monitor hd 3000 fail do not buy!!
Class Action Lawsuit - Gateway monitor hd 3000 fail do not buy!!
Do you know about - Gateway monitor hd 3000 fail do not buy!!
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You see this article for information about what you want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Gateway monitor hd 3000 fail do not buy!!
Gateway monitor hd 3000 fail do not buy!! Tube. Duration : 3.82 Mins.Class Action Law Suit Against Sony | Don't join forces with Rats!
Class Action Lawsuit - Class Action Law Suit Against Sony | Don't join forces with Rats!
Do you know about - Class Action Law Suit Against Sony | Don't join forces with Rats!
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check this out article for facts about what you need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is Class Action Law Suit Against Sony | Don't join forces with Rats!
Class Action Law Suit Against Sony | Don't join forces with Rats! Video Clips. Duration : 10.00 Mins.RBG- 1971 Attica Rebellion And Massacre 2 of 3
Class Action Lawsuit - RBG- 1971 Attica Rebellion And Massacre 2 of 3
Do you know about - RBG- 1971 Attica Rebellion And Massacre 2 of 3
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You read this article for home elevators an individual want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is RBG- 1971 Attica Rebellion And Massacre 2 of 3
RBG- 1971 Attica Rebellion And Massacre 2 of 3 Tube. Duration : 10.02 Mins.SAVIORS OF THE FOREST 2
Class Action Lawsuit - SAVIORS OF THE FOREST 2
Do you know about - SAVIORS OF THE FOREST 2
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the true about Class Action Lawsuit. You read this article for information on an individual want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is SAVIORS OF THE FOREST 2
SAVIORS OF THE FOREST 2 Tube. Duration : 23.22 Mins.WWE '12: 6-Man Elimination Chamber Match
Class Action Lawsuit - WWE '12: 6-Man Elimination Chamber Match
Do you know about - WWE '12: 6-Man Elimination Chamber Match
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check out this article for information on that want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is WWE '12: 6-Man Elimination Chamber Match
WWE '12: 6-Man Elimination Chamber Match Tube. Duration : 13.98 Mins.UK Students Fight University Fee Hikes In Court
Class Action Lawsuit - UK Students Fight University Fee Hikes In Court
Do you know about - UK Students Fight University Fee Hikes In Court
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It is not outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You check out this article for home elevators what you need to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is UK Students Fight University Fee Hikes In Court
UK Students Fight University Fee Hikes In Court Tube. Duration : 6.08 Mins.Violence and Violent Crime - The Gender notice
Class Action - Violence and Violent Crime - The Gender notice
Hello everybody. Today, I discovered Class Action - Violence and Violent Crime - The Gender notice. Which may be very helpful in my opinion and you. Violence and Violent Crime - The Gender noticeWomen and men both commit, and are victims of, crimes but are their perspectives, understandings and interpretations of crime (either as victim or perpetrator likely to be different)? How and why - or even if - is a matter of debate; theorising on these matters is difficult depending on the perspective of the researcher.
What I said. It is not the actual final outcome that the actual about Class Action. You check out this article for information on that wish to know is Class Action.Class Action
Men and women also commit violence but their motivations are likely to be different; men may do so to avow their dominance over a situation, a territory, or person; to ensure that their masculinity is not in doubt. Women may do so in defence of their children, themselves, family, friends and perhaps even their property. However, if women are becoming as violent as men for the same reasons as men, does this mean we are animated in a direction which is irreversible? Would such a trend, if it truly existed, necessarily be a perilous one? More importantly, why does the thought of women becoming violent (or becoming more violent) cause such consternation in society whilst violence by, and towards, men is thorough as part of their masculinity?
Women are statistically less likely to commit crimes, particularly crimes of violence; however, numbers of women being arrested, cautioned and imprisoned for violent offences are rising. Media reports and government statistics all appear to show that women are increasingly complicated in crime, particularly violent crime. In England and Wales, the estimate of females in custody was 4,445 (24 November 2006) with the top estimate being attributed to drugs offences whilst violence was second. In Scotland, the figure was 326 (24 November 2006), though ambiguous as it does not specify the gender of (i) 'lifers' who have been recalled (ii) those convicted but awaiting sentence/deportation (iii) those under sixteen years of age. Williams states that, in a nine year period, there was a rise of 140% for female offenders incarcerated (1993-2001) despite the fact that offending rates remained relatively stable. In the United States, figures show that although incarceration rates were rising, violent offences by women were going in the opposite direction; women's involvement in violent offences showed a minimal rise (from 10.8% to 12.3%). This may, however, be reflective of changes in recording, prosecuting and incarcerating female offenders rather than any actual increase in the rate of female offending itself.
Violence is often fuelled by substance abuse, via alcohol or drugs or both and this is the case both for men and women. Males perpetrate the top numbers of crimes, violent or otherwise, and they also inventory for the top estimate of victims of violent assaults; women, however, as perpetrators of violent crimes in particular are on the any way women are apparently working hard to catch up. Certainly, the media portrays young women as being 'as bad as boys' when it comes to violence, particularly when fuelled by alcohol; city centres across the Uk have a large problem with violence but this is perhaps due to an expanding culture of binge-drinking. Indeed, as recently as December 2006, reports of violence fuelled by alcohol were in the news again; this time, however, the focus was not the violence as such, but that the perpetrators of the violence were female.
A Bbc report quotes Dr Jon Cole of Liverpool University who believes that, whilst it does not cause aggression, alcohol stops sensible choices being made "You make the easiest choice, which is often aggression". The same report refers to a study by The Glasgow Centre for the Study of Violence which showed that women were complicated in almost half of all the pub fights observed. Further, healing explore shows that testosterone levels in women rise by fifty percent in females, but is lower in males when they come to be drunk.
Violence any way is a term which can be interpreted in many ways: one particular study shows females' insight and interpretation of violence is unusual (see Burman below). There are thorough definitions of violence or aggression: crime is "an action which constitutes a serious offence against an personel or...state..."; violence: "behaviour animated bodily force intended to hurt, damage, or kill; power of emotion or of a destructive natural force". Aggression: "hostile or violent behaviour or attitudes; the act of attacking without provocation...".
In the study undertaken by Burman et al, verbal abuse and the spreading of rumours was seen as 'violent' or more aggressive than bodily violence (such as being punched). If verbal, rather than physical, violence causes more concern girls, should we take this as an indication that girls reconsider violence to be a psychological rather than bodily problem? Why do some girls have a greater fear of violence which is spoken whilst most people, and particularly boys, are more inclined to class violence as a bodily assault?
Fear of violence is often more potent as it is the 'unknown'; the strict time and place of being the recipient of violence is unknown with domestic violence victims, but they are kept on alert because they know it is going to occur at some point. However, from a legal point of view, violence and violent crime, is where bodily injury is inflicted and only in modern years was psychological trauma thorough as a 'violent offence' (see protection from Harassment Act 1997).
Given the low numbers of women who offend, both historically and in modern times, it is unsurprising that studies into female criminality were whether ignored or undertaken in relation to their interaction with, and response to, male violence and criminality. It is also unsurprising that female criminologists found the need to fill this gap. In the past, women were classified into two types: mad or bad. Most female offenders convicted of violent crimes were seen as women who fought back against domestic violence or who protected their children; others were thought about 'evil' and historically, were thought about witches or concubines of the devil. We may now have a best insight of criminality, but this has not stopped the 'bad' or 'mad' viewpoint from being represented by the media, the public and in some quarters of the criminal justice law when females are involved.
Women are viewed as more deviant than their male counterparts as they have not only offended against the criminal code but also against public convention. Whereas public rules and practice have changed over time, women are still thought about to be mothers, wives, lovers and workers but not offenders; rarely do we expect women to commit violent offences. Those who do are vilified for years perhaps serving longer terms than male counterparts, particularly when they offend against those they are supposed to protect.
Myra Hindley and Beverley Allit both murdered children; Allit did so as a nurse so could be again seen as doubly deviant as her vocation - as well as her gendered role - was one of carer.
It is difficult of course to do a allowable comparative determination without knowing the details of the 'violence against the person' offences committed by both men and women. There are a estimate of 'assaults' committed by women which may well not have been prosecuted had they been committed by men; it is impossible to say without knowing more about both the offence and the offender (regardless of gender). Obtaining goods for sale (to provide money to pay bills/food) or obtaining goods - such as shoplifting food/clothing is more tasteless among female offenders than males. determination of current statistics shows that the top estimate of female offenders committed 'drugs offences' with the second top being for 'violence against the person' followed by 'theft and handling'. For many, women who commit violence do so mainly in self-defence or protection of a child; females are not seen as inherently violent. But is this perception false or misleading?
Most studies of the culture and phenomenon of gangs tend to focus on males (though some do mention 'girl gangs' or girls in gangs as a peripheral but distinctly intricate part of a predominantly male gang). However, a problem arises which is twofold: firstly and perhaps obviously, not all female offenders - violent or otherwise - are in gangs. Secondly, there is a danger that the study will furnish results more likely to provide an insight into gang culture rather than any comparative study of female and male criminality.
Current statistics show the top estimate of female offenders committed 'drugs offences' with the second top for 'violence against the person' followed by 'theft and handling'. For many, women who commit violence do so mainly in self-defence or protection of a child; females are not seen as inherently violent. But is this perception false?
One of the potential reasons behind women committing fewer 'serious' offences could be their role as mother/carer. Given that a large proportion of children are whether brought up by particular mothers or by mothers due to fathers working longer hours (or being the sole breadwinner) women commonly have the main, if not sole, responsibility for child rearing. Therefore, the capability for women commit crimes - unless they left their children elsewhere, or were childless - was severely restricted. The risk of being caught and sent to prison - and violent offences commonly attract higher tariffs - meant that any advantage of committing a crime seemed unattractive. Of course, this assumes that women who commit offences chose to do so for pragmatic/rational reasons; classicists will be jumping for joy!
In terms of victimisation, women are largely accountable for rape or other sexual assaults but even here the estimate of disproportionate statistical determination is difficult given that male rape and male sexual charge is under-reported and (in some countries) legally ignored. Stigma attached to victims of sexual charge is horrendous for female victims but this is more so when victims are male. This is largely due to men being perceived as (i) the aggressors or (ii) physically able to fight off an assault.
In England and Wales, legislation is quite exact in terms of the crime of rape in that a penis must be inserted into whether a vagina or the anal tube (or mouth); so whilst a victim may be whether male or female, the perpetrator must be male. In Scots law, the act of rape can only be committed by a man on a woman; male on male sexual charge is just that - sexual/indecent charge but not rape. Where victim and perpetrator are one and the same (e.g. An abused wife retaliates against her husband) there are inconsistencies in the middle of the genders. agreeing to Cedaw, women are more likely to 'to be killed than to kill' but the legal law discriminates; women who kill their [often abusive] husbands are convicted of murder whilst men who kill their wives are convicted of manslaughter. Thus, if convicted of murder which women are, the only sentence ready is life; even when convicted of murder, men and women are still treated differently with tariffs higher for women than men.
Male perpetrators may be more selfish in their advent to crimes; committing offences which are directly of advantage and which give an immediate sense of gain. In violence, men use violence as a first, rather than last resort, as it on two levels it gets them what they want: the first is the object of their attention, the second is status and self-belief in their own ability. Violence for many men seems to be a way to [re]assert their masculinity. Violence committed by women - on the whole - appears to be a last resort; there was no other way to get whether in or out of a situation and thus violence was used.
Of course, there are criminal couples: men and women who work together - though not necessarily in harmony - to make financial and other gains. Prostitutes have for many years used (and been used by) male pimps. The men offer protection, protection from harassment whether this is from other working women, volatile clients and other pimps who want to 'muscle in' on the money earned by the prostitute.
The pimp will use violence as a means of asserting his status has being in control of both the woman and the environment within which they work. Of course, the prostitute herself is committing a criminal offence in soliciting on the street and may herself use violence against her client and other working women. The implied consent that women give to men who pimp them is that violence is acceptable: they will not want nor like the violence used against them but most accept it as part of their lives and also want the volatility of the pimp to be known to others as a way of protecting themselves from other females and clients.
Theorising about the motivations which drive offenders, male and female, tends to mean that we encapsulate whole groups of habitancy by defining them on the basis of personel psycho-social profiles. This may be applicable for instances where groups commit crimes on a large scale, over periods of time, such as ethnic cleansing (which often entails the mass slaughter of males and systematic rape and impregnation of females - as seen in Bosnia for example).
Of course, systematic rape of females - and occasionally males - is a form of violence often used by groups of individuals sanctioned by the state (as seen in war situations) and also individuals in a domestic setting (the husband who troops his wife, girlfriend, etc.) and sexual violence is almost unique in that women - particularly in Scots' Law - are not convicted of rape. There are cases where accomplice of facilitation of rape is conducted by a female against an additional one female but these tend to be rare. One example would be the sexual abuse of young women by Fred West who raped and abused women with his wife; even here, however, the case showed that Fred West has systematically abused his wife and thus she may have complied and committed these acts to reduce her own victimisation.
Crime in general, whether violent or otherwise, may be more truly identifiable as a male characteristic in society rather than female naturally because of historical public conventions. Women had to care for their homes and families; opportunities for women to offend were minimal in that they had dinky entrance to places which would allow them to commit crimes. Men, on the other hand, were often the workers, the drinkers, the socialisers (women entertained their friends, but this was often in homes rather than public houses, etc.) and thus opening was greater for them. If nothing else, in historical times, the clothing a woman wore would make burglary (e.g. Entering a house via a window and then removing goods) quite difficult though perhaps not impossible! Even in more modern times, women were seen to steal for 'good' rather than 'bad' reasons: they stole food from supermarkets rather than goods to be sold for hard cash.
Those who were caught may cry and reduce themselves to the 'helpless desperate female' and an invariably male protection guard or store manager, may find himself torn in the middle of chivalry or condolence towards the woman and his job. If a man was caught in the same act of theft, it is potential that (if denial did not work) then aggression would ensue in a negative reaction from staff and thus prosecutions of males were more likely.
Given that males commonly appear to be more confrontational - and this may be anthropological in origin - whereas woman appear to take the path of least resistance, it is potential that perpetrators of crimes (particularly non-violent crimes) are likely to find that their gender reflects their culpability in the eyes of the law and any enforcement officers.
Over the last few years, and in particular in relation to younger offenders, females are less likely to be able to use their gender to leave punishment (though there may be some instances were this still applies, for instance speeding in cars). Whereas historically women might have been viewed as immoral, but not necessarily criminal, modern years have seen a shift so that they are not only immoral but most certainly criminal and thus should be treated equally by the criminal justice system. Inevitably, however, the public will view the criminal female as more criminal or more deviant than her male counterpart.
Women may also have a more pragmatic advent to criminal activity, violent or otherwise. It might be that they are more careful about exposing themselves to temptation for confident crimes (such as theft, fraud, etc.) or are so careful that they may go undetected. Men may well advent crime with a more arrogant attitude and feel their capability to leave detection is greater than male or female counterparts.
What theories therefore can be applied, if any whether partially or wholly, to violence and the men and the women who use it? It is difficult to state which 'criminological theory' can truly be applied thoroughly to criminality without being thought about whether aligned to one discourse or an additional one even if the intention is to avoid this. It may be impossible to apply the same theories of criminality for men and women given that attempts thus far have failed to provide any conclusive answer into the causation of criminality in female or male crimes.
The problem with analysing the comparison in the middle of male and female offenders is that whilst their motives might appear different, this is not necessarily the case. Influences such as biology, psychology, economic and schooling as well as society in general will have an impact on each individual's behaviour and their insight of what is acceptable. Violence is so often used as a means for dispute resolution - particularly in the younger generation - that we may be on an irreversible path.
As seems tasteless within criminology, in order to justify criminality, attempts are made to encompass causation with one particular ideal or theory; it is due to this endeavor to treat theories as mutually exclusive which results in failure.
Women are dissimilar in terms of their responses to crime and in particular violence, their use of violence against others and their insight of violence and crime in general. Women have been dominated for so long and now they pick to fight back, they are regarded as more dangerous. They are altering perceptions held over a long period of time; that is not to say women will turn into Amazonian women ready to dominate the world and make men submissive creatures! However, if we - as women - want equality, it seems we have to fight twice as hard (even if that fight turns physical).
The criminal justice law now deals with far more women offenders than old decades, but this is also likely to be in part attributable to the medicalisation of female offenders in the past. Now that this is no longer the case, women are identified as criminal not [mentally] ill and thus greater numbers are being included in criminal offending statistics. Greater reporting to the police, due to guarnatee requirements among other things, means that whereas those offences which may have been overlooked for being petty no longer are treated as inconsequential.
Whether one looks at the lack of implementation of equality for women, or whether men's masculinity is eroded by women's empowerment, whether abuse victims abuse others so they can gain control and power over another, many individuals commit crimes for reasons understood only by them - and perhaps not even then. Theories of crime, causation and criminality will be at ever expanding odds as elements of classicism, positivism, strain law or a 'pick-and-mix' advent to all three are rejuvenated depending on the year or decade.
Advances in sciences (natural and social) may also play a part in the hereafter of how criminality is considered; genetic or even public predisposition for criminality is not something which is seen on the movie screen, it is a reality which will be hitting us very soon if truly it has not already done so.
Indeed, September 2006 saw the Labour Government issue their plans to improve families' potential for achievement by the potential local or even governmental intervention for 'problem families'. Critics were reported as fearing that the Government was entering the perilous field of eugenics (so fatally but effectively seen while the Holocaust) or by creating Asbos for children who were yet to be born on the basis of their parents' socio-economic status.
Where does this leave the field of criminology? Governments may look to criminologists and other public scientists to address the request of crime and criminality and causes thereof but they may give dinky terms of reference for explore projects.
Criminology seeks to provide a definitive, exact answer to an inexact and (at times) inexplicable question: why do habitancy (whether male or female) commit crime? perhaps this is its failure and why, despite a increase of writers on the matter, nobody has arrived at an answer (which I argue is not potential in any event). Sociological, economical, psychological and biological factors all have to be thought about and taken into inventory when dealing with any offender, male or female. Many treat criminal causation theories as mutually exclusive.
Criminological law - even when considering all the elements therein - seeks to find a definitive answer where it is likely that none exist. Lack of a definitive answer, however, does not necessarily mean criminology has failed; it needs to evolve again. perhaps for criminological theory, answers to questions are as fluid as the times in which they are considered. Evolution of criminology and the theories therein mean criminologists will have to pick the most logical and pragmatic elements, and discard elements which are obviously flawed (whether in whole or in part). This may be the way forward.
Word Count: 3613
Bibliography
"Textbook on Criminology" Fifth Edition. Williams, K: Published by Oxford University Press: 2004
"Race, Gender & Class in Criminology: The Intersections". Edited by Milovanovic D & Schwartz M D Published by Garland Publishing in 1996. Chapter 7: "Sentencing Women to Prison" by Chesney-Lind, M
Concise Oxford English Dictionary: 11th Ed. Revised. Oxford University Press (2006).
"'Taking It To Heart': Girls and the meanings of violence.' The Meanings of Violence" Burman, M, Brown, J & Batchelor, S. Published by Routledge in 2003.
England & Wales valid Prison Statistics: Hm Prison Service: October 2006 valid habitancy Figures
Sexual Offences Act 1956; Criminal Justice & public Order Act 1994; Sexual Offences Act 2003. Produced by Hmso.
"Violence Against Women in the Uk" Kelly, L; Humphreys C; Sen, P & Womankind Worldwide. Cedaw Thematic Shadow Report. Published in 2003.
Bbc News Website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5312928.stm dated 5th September 2006
Bbc News Online Magazine: 'On The Lash' by Megan Lane & Tomiko Newson (see link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6213686.stm) dated 8th September 2006.
ASTON MARTIN DB9
Class Action Lawsuit - ASTON MARTIN DB9
Do you know about - ASTON MARTIN DB9
Class Action Lawsuit! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends. What I said. It isn't outcome that the actual about Class Action Lawsuit. You look at this article for information about a person want to know is Class Action Lawsuit.How is ASTON MARTIN DB9
ASTON MARTIN DB9 Video Clips. Duration : 21.42 Mins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)