A cover letter is a letter that you'd typically send along with a CV when you're applying for a job.

Imagine if someone gets your CV in response to many positions they have advertised. They have no idea which job you are sending the CV in response to, and they have even less of an idea why your CV is relevant to the job they have advertised. They'll just get frustrated and fling your CV to one side.


So a cover letter should (at a minimum) have the following:

What advertisement you are replying in response to;

A very brief introduction to yourself, stressing the qualities that the advertiser will find interesting;

A mention as to why you are the most suitable person for the job;

Any other information relevant to the application;

One or more closing sentences that convey a positive attitude towards getting the position.


I hope this helps,

Ka

It seems as if the girls are much more tolerant and liberal on this topic than the men. Even those girls who have said 'no' have qualified this quite clearly by expressing their concerns about whether such a person would be respectful and tolerant of their beliefs (a totally understandable view which I support).

Your own Personal code of ethics??

Yep.

decided on by yourself

Yep,  after my observations about the world.

,,,,,,inorder words u can change that when it is convinient??

No. Don't assume that everyone who has a personal code of ethics takes it as lightly as you might.

Dude I do not trust u to make that decision on right and wrong ok

That's OK. What's wrong and right to me might not be wrong and right to you.

2nd: Oh yeah,,,,,,it is the fear of God that makes me not do certain things ok. And If I did not have that fear,,,,,trust me I will go wild,,,,,,,,just like the fear of my father's spanking prevented me from breaking into that students locker in high school ok,,,,,,,now that fear has made that behavior of restraint second nature. SO again, it is the fear of God that makes me the man that I am

So you do things because you are afraid of God and don't want to incur his anger,  rather than because you love him and want to do make him happy with your actions.

All riiiight,

How can u not believe in something at least,,,,,,,I mean how do u guys live sef,,,,really?,,,,,what motivates u to be moral if u don't believe that u will be judged by your actions someday,,,,,,,

Emmie4J,

What motivates me? My own personal code of ethics. I would never do to others what I wouldn't want them to do to me; I try as much as possible to make those around me happier as long as it is not at a cost to my personal happiness. I'm not driven by the fear of punishment or the desire for a reward.

If I did not believe that somebody will judge me some day, trust me,,,,I will f**k every girl I can, even rape some,,,,,,I will cheat as much people as I can,,,,,,drink so much beer till my stomach bulge,,,,,,,

Are you telling me it is fear of judgment that is motivating you? I find that somewhat troubling. Let's say you were a father, and you learnt your son was only obeying you because he was afraid that you would punish him, but if not for that he would run wild. What would you think of that son?

WHat if my child asks me why he/she cannot lie for example,,,,,,,my wife will tell them its because it is not nice and I will tell them because God says we shouldnt.,,,,,I think it will just be too much chaos,,,,,

Well, there can be more than one reason for not doing the same thing - abi? But yes - this is something that both parents need to discuss properly before marriage.

IAH (and any others would consider marrying a non-believer),

I'm curious - how would you handle an situation where your child asked you and your non-believing spouse if there was God? Do you worry that the child would be confused if you gave one answer and your spouse gave another?

Seun,

I bet you'll get a lot of 'nos'.

It's an article of faith (at least with Christianity) - "do not be unevenly yoked with an unbeliever". I suspect that if someone does marry such a person, it will perhaps be after the person has been friends with the believer for so long that the believer is comfortable with him (and it will usually be a him) and if there is absolutely nobody else on the horizon.

I'm doing some informal research, and I'd appreciate it if you Nairalanders could answer the following questions:

Let's say you had the power to affect people's minds so that they would do anything you wanted. Would you use this power at all?

If you would use it, how frequently and on what occasions would you use it?

Would you use it to make someone to become strongly attracted to you?

Thanks,

Ka

- Private prisons should be established to supplement public prisons.  Any investor who can build a secure and humane facility to house prisoners should be permitted to run one.

Presumably, the running of these prisons will be subject to government regulations so that if a prisoner who has been sentenced by the state is made to serve his sentence as delivered.

- Prisoners should be permitted to apply to be moved to such prisons where, if accepted, they will 'pay' for the better housing conditions by working a predetermined job within the premises of the private prison.

- Prisoners who are dissatisfied with a particular private prison should be able to apply to be transferred a different private prison or be returned immediately to the public prison system.

Why should a prisoner who has violated the laws of the state have a say in how they are punished?

[A system of rewarding prisoners for hardwork] will enable the economy to tap from the talents of those otherwise hardworking people who are languishing in prison, instead of them being liabilities to taxpayers.  Since prisoners are not forced to work - they are free to return to government prisons - it won't amount to slave labor.  When they are finally released, they would have lots of valuable work experience which will help them to build crime-free lives.

This is a good idea, but why not simply introduce it into the public prison system?

GL, they believe everyone basically gets as much freedom as possible as long it does not negatively impact the lives of others.

Yep.

So, things like a ban on gay marriage or certain religious sects (As long as they are not hurting others) would not be tolerated by Libertarians.

Yep.

Personally, I don't like the libertarian mind-set. It is almost as if they assume that people are naturally good and can some how be trusted to make right decisions.

I'm not clear what you mean when you say "make the right decisions". Do you mean "right decisions" for themselves? If so, it's not so much about being trusted to make the right decisions, it's more about having the freedom to learn by trial and error what the right or wrong decisions are. After all, nobody knows you better than yourself.



It is my understanding that people that do not adhere to natural laws (i.e. not living nude out in the woods) are corrupted and

therefore cannot be trusted to make untainted decisions. Hence, I would rather a fair and just government make the rules that all should follow.

"Fair and just goverment" - you'll search for a long time before you come across one of those. God help you if the goverment you get is one that believes it is fair that people shouldn't take a bath more than once a month in order to conserve water!

Libertarian.

It's all about freedom. Why should I poke my nose in other people's business? And why should they poke their nose in mine?

Interesting idea, but the devil is in the details.

For example:

"2. Towards the end of each year, each government department must prepare a separate budget for the next year and present it to the senate for ratification. Adjustments will be made until the senate is satisfied."

I can foresee each department putting forward budgets for extraordinary schemes just so that they can claim a larger share of the pie. In the end, power will lie with the Senate. Expect lots of large multicoloured polystrene bags to trade hands.


Also, although it will try to ensure efficiency, I don't know whether it will really discourage corruption. As Education Minister, who is to stop me if I divert part of the funds meant for building a school into something else and build the school with inferior materials with what's left over?

Seun,

If you built a community generator, how would you handle the issue of pricing and power theft?

I do agree with you generally about the need for private investment in power generation and distribution. I'm just hoping that there's a scientific breakthrough on the battery energy density front so that a battery the size and weight of a computer keyboard will store enough electricity to supply a room inhabited by a single power power for a month. Then you'll have all manner of enterprises springing up purely to enable you to recharge your batteries and PHCN will be consigned to the land of irrelevancy.

I'd like to believe that the reason women weren't more involved in engineering and science disciplines was purely down to sociological reasons, but I don't think biological factors can be completely ruled out. I mean, how is it that in most human societies, men and women tend to gravitate to the same sorts of role - men doing the more physical and mechanical stuff and women doing the more social and human stuff?

The topic should be changed to "Is Life Really Better For <insert name of individual> abroad?"

As long as our circumstances, experiences and inclinations are different, it would be unwise to apply the same criteria in assessing whether it's better to live in Nigeria or abroad.

Kimba,

While I'm no history fanatic, I share your curiosity about the places I live in, so I'm sympathetic to you in your search for the origin of place names in Lagos.

I think some of the names are related to families that used to own the land, e.g. Oshodi I think was named after Tapa Oshodi. I also think that Ikoyi had a similar origin, but I'm not sure.

Some of them are probably named for some event or other, e.g. Obalende - the king has returned home

Some from what they used to be used for, e.g. Apapa - field

Some have colonial origins, e.g. Victoria Island

Not sure of the rest, but perhaps other people can chip in.

Ka

7. Take unneeded items out of the car. You don't need to carry snow chains around with you in the summertime. Just make sure to put them back in when winter comes around.

Summertime? Snow chains? Winter? In Nigeria?

I agree with Seun that it's not right to impose an arbitrary minimum capitalisation amount for all banks to comply with. Of course it's possible for a bank's capitalisation value to be much less and for it to be a successful profitable bank.

However, I suspect that the imposition of the minimum amount was a means to an end. Perhaps the idea is to get the banks to think beyond the current traditional means of making money by banking, to raise their game, so to speak. No bank can expect to keep on trading by the usual cosy round tripping or financing of import deals, especially because there are now about 20 other big banks breathing down its neck and looking to grab market share from it. This would be different if there were lots of small banks - the big banks would feel less threatened.

But Nferyn is also right that the new banks need to be properly regulated. We're now hearing all sorts of stories of financial mismanagement from the dozen or so banks that have failed to find partners in the new dispensation. This shouldn't have happened if the CBN was doing its job properly.

There's a fuller version of the original interview here.

dejiolowe: Ka, next time u get to hell, I bet u should just stay there...

Funny you should mention that... I actually spoke to the devil today and I complained I was freezing where I was. He was quite touched by my discomfort, and offered me an all-expenses trip to [size=14pt]Hell [/size] where it's warm and comfortable. So I'll be out there for a while, having a great time hobnobbing with the great and the good.

Anyone you want me to pass your regards on to?

Those who think that the repentance of the Devil will mean an end of wickedness and suffering are sadly deluded.

Let me tell you, as someone who has seen Hell with my own two korokoro eyes, I can tell you that there are many, many other capable demons waiting to take over.

There's the aptly named Vice-Devil, Assistant Devil, Lieutentant-Devil, Acting Devil, Devil's Right Hand Demon, Devil's Left Hand Demon, Demon In Charge of Torture, Demon In Charge of Stoking the Fires of Hell, in fact the list is endless... and they all pray that the Devil should repent one day, too!

But these british peeps.. them be mugu oh.. original correct authentic mugu.. how persin go swave u twice the same way...

I found this statement very funny. Do you really think that the UK government would have let him go if they had a vested interest in keeping him in the UK? For all you know, the UK government may have 'let him go' so that they wouldn't get involved in Nigerian political intrigues - their view might have been "let Obasanjo go and deal with Alamieyeseigha himself if he so big on fighting corruption".

I THINK NIGERIA NEEDS A FEMALE PRESIDENT

I'm troubled by statements like this. Why should the gender of the president matter more than their intelligence, charisma, knowledge or political skills? It's almost as bad as saying Nigeria needs a <insert name of favoured ethnic group here> president.

but Birthday is sorta special bcuz it marks d day u grow a year older!!!!

So what's special about a year? Why not celebrate your birth[b]date[/b] every month? Think of the benefits... twelve times the number of parties! (Too bad if you're born on the 31st of the month. )

Of course the real reason everyone celebrates birthdays is because everyone else does so.

I hate birthdays.

Hold on, hold on - let me clarify that. I don't hate other people celebrating their birthdays. I think it's a thing of joy that in this world where there is so much pain and suffering, people can take time out to dedicate at least one day of the year to par-tay.

What I mean is that I hate other people expecting me to celebrate my birthday like they do.

Of course, it wasn't always this way. When I was younger, I (like any normal kid) used to look forward to my birthday with much anticipation, eagerly expecting the cakes, drinks and other confectionery that was served during the celebration.

I think the link was broken when I went off to boarding school to do my secondary school education and had to stop (because my birthday fell well within term time). Of course, by the time I finished secondary school, birthdays were no longer a star attraction for me, and this indifference towards my birthday morphed into antipathy towards it during my university years. These days, I just look back and wonder what the whole point is.

I mean, if you really look at it, the things worth celebrating are the things that you've achieved. You celebrate them because the events remind you of a time of happiness... or a time of triumph over adversity... or they mark a stage in your life which shows you are progessing on your way to becoming an independent, well adjusted person in society.

So there are loads of events that I can certainly see worth celebrating because they fill you with happiness when you remember them...

...like passing your secondary school exams with flying colours...

...or getting your first job...

...or driving your first car...

...or your first meeting with the love of your life...

...or moving out to live on your own...

...or starting a website that has over six thousand registered members   ...

...but for the life of me, I have no memory of anything on the day I was born! In fact, if anything, my mother should be celebrating it, not me - because not only did she have to put up with nine months of pregnancy, she also endured several hours of very painful childbirth! All (I am told) I did on that day was to yell in anger at being expelled from my warm and comfortable abode. And that's not something, in my opinion, that is worthy of any sort of celebration.

So the whole may carry on celebrating birthdays, but please leave me out of it. The next time I'm asked when my birthday is, I will say "31st of November". Or I might say "I consider that my life started the day I was conceived, but I have no idea exactly what day that was."

It seems the main justification that parents cite for sending their child to boarding school is that 'it toughens them up'.

I think there's a big problem with the parents if they feel that they cannot train their children to be strong and independent themselves, and instead have to surrender their role as the number one influence in their child's life to a bunch of complete strangers whose morality and parental abilities are completely unknown.

"Do real men cook stew?"

Of course they do. I was just parodying the 'macho' attitude that some men adopt, where to enter a kitchen is an affront to their masculinity. A real man would strive to be self-reliant and not expect his wife/girlfriend to do every single thing for him.

WesleyanA,

It's difficult to debate the issue of gender inequality with you, because nowhere in your argument have you given a concise definition of what you mean by the term - your argument has shifted all over the place. Does it mean a situation where equal numbers of men and women are employed in a profession? Does it mean a situation where exactly the same numbers of men and women are engaged in a particular leisure pursuit? Does it mean a situation where men and women are getting exactly the same pay, support and opportunities? Is it realistic to aim for this, given that men and women have different abilities and desires?

It hasn't helped that throughout this discussion, you've continuously attributed to me things I haven't said (like this latest statement about me being forced to watch matches). It's almost as though because I haven't agreed with everything you've said, you taken to characterising me as a woman-hating person, and everything I have said has been interpreted with that view in mind.

Anyway, the whole discussion has been centered around sport because those are the two examples you chose to bring up. Personally, I am less interested in vague notions of 'gender inequality' (whatever that might be). I'm more interested in ensuring that all individuals are not forcibly prevented from doing things that they want to do, and are not forced to do things they don't want to do. This is especially if allowing them to do or not to do what they want doesn't cause direct material harm to another person. I'm not interested in ensuring that everyone is equal - I'm more interested in ensuring that everyone is happy.



Seun,

Do let me know if you are able to find out what gender inequality is, will you? I'm doubtful I'm going to find out in this thread.

you keep emphasizing the word "force" like i'm threatning you with it!
no one's forcing anyone to do what they don't want to do.
if you take showing a girl's soccer match on tv as forcing the viewers to watch then you need help. some people don't like to watch soccer. are they being forced to watch it? NO. it's a free world. don't watch it if you hate it!

You really do seem to favour the strawman style of argument. I haven't said anything about showing a girl's soccer match being the same as forcing viewers to watch, so I have no idea where you got that from.

However, there is the issue of how to get the match shown in the first place. Do you force the networks to show it? Or get the government to pay for the matches to be shown?

how much success have i had? same as you have had in convincing me that there's no gender inequality in sports!

So not a lot, then.

still, i'll repeat you can't decide who someone's role model should be. you shouldn't be "advicing" kids who they should be inspired by. it doesn't matter if you know what their interests are. you can teach them about certain people and make them seem like heroes buts it's your kid who will decide for themselves if they want to be like the character or not!
you'll make a terrible councellor. seriously.

<Sigh> I hope you don't always conduct your arguments like this, reading what you want to read instead of what I've written. I said:

But if I see that my children have a particular interest, I don't see any harm in pointing out someone who has pursued that interest as someone they might be inspired by.

How on earth does that equate to deciding (as you've written) that this should be someone's role model? Did you see the word 'might' in the phrase 'might be inspired'? That means even I don't know for sure that they would adopt that person as a role model. Or does pointing out someone mean that I am compelling my child to adopt the person as a role model?

Oh yes, I would tell my children about people who I think they might benefit from and be inspired by based on my understanding of their interests, in the same way I would give advice to someone whose interests I was certain of. If you think that's terrible counselling, then I guess we have a different understanding of the meaning of the word.

you don't have to agree to be superior to females to be a discriminator.
if you understand that there's gender discrimination and you argue for it. it makes you one indirectly.
if you have bias against one or favor one person over another because of gender, it's discrimination.

I've never argued that I'm not a discriminator - as I said, everyone discriminates on all sorts of basis. What you haven't shown me is where I said that men are superior to women in the same way that a racist would say that blacks are superior to whites. And I asked you to show me, because you were comparing my attitude to that of a racist.

That's why there are feminists. they are working hard to better the condition of women in society.
actually when soccer started,  women weren't allowed to play any sport at all. the condition of women was overwhelmingly TERRIBLE then. they weren't allowed in theatres either!.

now that they can now play the sport. it's our role and the men's role to help bring it up.

I don't know enough about the history of soccer to comment on this. But anyone who has done work to remove the legal barriers to women playing soccer deserves to be commended.

Please note that I make a distinction between people being barred for no legitimate reason from doing something that they want to do and are able to do, and people not being able to do something because they do not have the co-operation of other people who do not wish to co-operate (for whatever reason). I'm strongly against any situation where any group that is forced - yes, forced - to do something that they don't want to do, or forced not to do something they want to do.

so you think TV stations just show commercials just pick commercials like food? no! if you want to promote your product, you pay the station, and they show your commercial.
if a certain sport want to show a commercial. they pay the station money and they show it! now where do this money come from? is what you should be asking.
men's sports get all the funding and women's sports get little.

TV stations will show sports that they thing lots of people will watch and they will be able to make lots of money on from advertising (the more people watch an ad, the more the advertiser can charge). Presumably, TV stations don't feel that enough people watch women's soccer to justify charging companies lots of money to advertise... at least, not as much as they might charge for a men's soccer match.

see, your problem is -- you don't want to share. you want 100% for men and 0% for women.. .  significant drop in the quality of life for men? do you get what i mean by equality? 50%-50% or something approximate to that!!!!!
gosh. .

There you go, attributing to me what I haven't said. Did you read this in my last post?

Exactly. And I'm saying that in changing the condition, they should be looking out for a win-win situation, where everyone is happy, or at least where nobody is unhappy.

yes the government does support sports (esp. male soccer).

I thought that competitive soccer was a commercial concern. Certainly in the Europe, the government involvement is minimal and restricted to administration.

i'm refering to everyone. male and female.
men's soccer have more than enough support. it doesn't hurt to give the females a little if not as much as the male gets. but things don't happen overnight so i'll have to say the condition is improving.
gone are the days women weren't even allowed to participate in any sport at all.

I don't have a problem lending my support against legal restrictions or arbitrary rules restricting women's freedoms to play soccer. Is there any other kind of support you feel that the individual should offer to women's soccer?

what if you badly want that specific job? then you'll be forced to work in a job you didn't like. see what i mean?

Well, I'm a gradualist. I don't believe that it is likely that I will get what I want on day one - in fact, sometimes it may not even be a good idea. Yes, I would work in a job I don't like - in fact, ten years ago I was working in a job I hated. But I used the experience, contacts, etc. that I got in that job to move on to something else, and today I'm doing something I enjoy and that pays well.

oh so you agree? so why are you arguing with me about inequality then. you agree there is gender inequality!
what i'm doing about the situation? trying to convince men that there is gender inequality. because some don't believe there is  . .  . trying to convince them to support the feminist cause. to help us help ourselves.. . .  that's about what i can do for now.
i'll like all those men who make their wives victims of domestic abuse to end up behind bars

I didn't say there wasn't a difference in how easy it was to get positions. What I was questioning was whether in some cases this was necessarily a bad thing. Of course in the case of getting employment (that has a direct effect on someone's material well being), I cannot argue against opening up opportunities for employment.

Out of curiosity, how much success have you met in convincing men of this fact? Do you try to convince them with facts, or do you appeal to emotions?

a role model is someone that inspires an individual and it's kind of lame of you to advice someone who his role model should be. i hope you wouldn't do that to your kids when you grow up to have some.

Actually, you're right - I don't know enough about your life, so it was wrong for me to presume to advise you, and I apologise if you took offence. But if I see that my children have a particular interest, I don't see any harm in pointing out someone who has pursued that interest as someone they might be inspired by.

why i can't compare racial discrimination and gender discrimination.

if you discriminate on basis of sex and gender, what makes me think you can't discriminate on basis of race?

Well, I did say previously we all discriminate... but I don't hold with the view that one gender is superior to another gender (as a racist would hold to a view that one race is superior to another race). If you think I have expressed this view, I would appreciate it if you could show me where I have done so.

why should a boys sport have broader popular support (i mean very significantly broad) than girls'. It's not like we're talking about swimming and soccer not that would make sense but .. ."boys soccer" and "girls soccer".

and why should girls have to work hard and look for "supporters" and "petitions" or whatever when boys get all these automatically w/o raising a finger!

that's gender inequality there at work.

Well, you have to work hard to overcome any disadvantage in life... the reality is that when soccer started, more men were playing it than women, so it has had more time to become popular and gain broader support. I maintain that it's pointless funding a sport that doesn't have support in the name of gender equality.

where ever it was you said people who hate girls soccer shouldn't have to support it. and right now i can't say you're supporting it so i'll have to assume you hate it!

So if I don't support something, then I hate it. I see.

you don't know why there are lower figures viewing girls sports? that's easy -- they don't show women's sports!!! when talk to a kid about soccer what comes to mind is boys! because that's all they show on tv. boys soccer!. if they showed girls soccer on tv often there are people who watch it (other than you that is).

And this is the fundamental disagreement between us. You think that most important factor in getting people to take an interest in a sport is showing more of it. On the other hand, I believe that this is not as important, and even if it were, it is unrealistic to expect commercial stations to show something that isn't guaranteed to make them any money in the short to medium term.

anybody that says "i love boys soccer than girls soccer because of gender" is a discriminator!!!

Well, everybody discriminates. For me, the problem is when the discrimination leads directly and unavoidably to a very significant drop in the quality of life of another human being. On the other hand, if I happen to prefer being treated by female nurses than male nurses, that's very acceptable, as nobody is being put at a significant disadvantage as a result of my preference.

if you love men's soccer and you see girls soccer on tv (if they show it that is  ) you shouldn't say i'm not watching it because girls are playing. i'll call such a person a mysoginist.

Now I laughed when I read that.

maybe if the tv commercials do show women's soccer, it will gain more support.

most importantly if it were supported financially like men's soccer is.

So who should do the supporting? The government? Does the government support men's soccer?

why can't one support men and women's soccer at the same time. we're talking of equality here. 50/50.

boys get stuff, girls get stuff too.

When you say 'why can't one support', who exactly are you referring to here?

don't tell me men should be happy and girls shouldn't because they weren't happy in the first place. that's why there are feminists. to change the condition/norm!!!

Exactly. And I'm saying that in changing the condition, they should be looking out for a win-win situation, where everyone is happy, or at least where nobody is unhappy.

exactly you wouldn't be happy about not getting the job!

and you wouldn't be happy about working in an organization that discriminates.

Yeah, but I wouldn't get stuck on it. I'd move on and look for something else...

what if i told you all the good jobs discriminated and you have to be a shoe polisher (nurse for women since that's the only job for them). to be taken by merit?

i'll wish you goodluck on your search. because that's what women face!!!

I agree that is it much more difficult for women to get good jobs than men. But let me ask you - how would you go about correcting the situation?

how would you proove? there are tons of other blacks like you looking for jobs without caring what they are paid because they don't have a choice. no one wants to hire them. if you decide to leave, there are always 100 people waiting to fill your position!
do you think blacks didn't try that when they were being discriminated at? it never worked trust me!
it's only when the whites realize that they need to end discrimination that they made a big step. civil rights activists like malcolm x and martin luther did their share also. and who am i to forget ROSA PARKS! the woman who wouldn't let some stupid men tell her where to sit on a bus!!

I could respond to this, but I'm going to let it slide because it would take this thread off topic.

i choose to have ROSALIND FRANKLIN as my role model and i wouldn't care for your advice.

That's why it's advice - you're not compelled to take it.

...you also should be ashamed of yourself fighting against the feminist cause and them going later on to talk about people who are racists. they are no different from you!

I'm very mystified at your tendency to attribute to me things that I haven't said. Are you sure you're reading this thread and not some other thread elsewhere? 

Now that I have a free microsecond...

[quote Author=WesleyanA]hahahha what are you saying. My school's policy? it happens in almost every school!
how do the sports become popular! through money and support. if the girls sports get support adn financial aid, they will be popular too. and that's my poing exactly!!!!![/quote]

I don't live in the US, so you mustn't assume I know about how schools operate there.

Really, I feel this is less of a gender issue than a popular sport issue. If you had told me that your school had decided to fund a men's unicycling team and not fund a women's unicycling team (even though there was no evidence of support of either sport), then I would have said that gender bias was at work here.

In my opinion, the only time when it is worth spending money on a promoting sport is where there is evidence of grassroots support of the sport, i.e. it has broad popular support amongst a particular community. Otherwise, you spend money on a sport that few people care about and few people turn up to watch and few people benefit from.

So perhaps your girls' soccer team should work on building up that grassroots support, and if you believe there is already that support, then get the supporters to petition your school - if there are many supporters writing in, surely the school will notice soon enough!

you hate women's soccer?

Now where did I say that?

just the same way i hate men's soccer!

I'm not fanatical about that either.

and it's the only one they play on tv. i hardly see women's soccer play! soccer is the same thing. why should you classify it as different just because of gender! see my point?

Well the evidence of soccer audiences indicate that men's soccer and women's soccer are not the same thing. I don't know why there are lower audiences and viewing figures for women soccer competitions, but that's just the way it is. I ask again: are you suggesting that people who love men's soccer should be forced to watch and support women's soccer games? And are you suggesting that commercial TV companies be made to show women's soccer which they have established is unpopular with their audiences, and lose money in the process?

My advice: if it bothers you that so few people are interested in women's soccer, why don't you launch a campaign to persuade (not force) them to get interested in it? Highlight the things that you think they will enjoy about it; promote these things everywhere and everytime, and who knows... one day, even you might get sick of the number of hours devoted to women's soccer.

happiness to come at the expense of others? what do you mean? men deserve to be happier than men? there are as many women as men in this world okay. and it doesn't hurt to give them equal attention. when does 50/50 become "at the expense of others"?

Of course no group of people deserves to be happier than another group. My point was that by forcing (since I can't think of how else were suggesting this would be done) men soccer fans to support women's soccer, you would be making them avoidably unhappy. Why do this, when both men's soccer fans and women's soccer fans can be happy?

would you be happy if a boss told you you aren't going to be hired because a white male counterpart who has the same credentials as you applied and for the sake of getting along with him (because blacks have this steriotype of being "criminals" you'll be loosing the spot.

I wouldn't be happy about not getting a job... but I would be happy not to work in an organisation that didn't judge people on merit, and I would also be happy that I was free to continue my search for a place that would take me on merit.

if you were to be hired however, you'll have to get less money just because you're black!

If I was getting less money because I was black, then I would have to prove in my job that I was a valuable asset so that if I decided all of a sudden I wanted to leave because of pay issues, I would have no problem getting a pay rise.



PS It's quite sad that there are quite a few female scientists like Rosalind Franklin who didn't get the recognition they deserved (another one was Lise Meitner). You might want to choose some other female scientist who did get recognition for her work (like Admiral Grace Hopper, or Eve Curie) as a role model.

I know one soldier who is a Colonel in the Army...
He does not belong to any battallion, armoured brigade, catonement, corp etc etc ....yet he is a soldier. He works directly with/for the comander-in-chief (c-in-c) of the armed forces.
He does not report to any superior officer other than the c-in-c.
He receives his salary dirctly from the hand of the c-in-c, though there is a department created for the purpose of handling his salary issues.
During war time he has takes orders only from the c-in-c, though there are Generals that have been designated by the C-in-C to give him orders.
He does not go to the Military hospital when wounded at battle.... he goes to the C-in-C's office for his healing.

That soldier is one smart dude. He doesn't waste his time with subordinates when he can get deluxe treatment from the Head Honcho himself.