Search Results: how to add a link

Are they simple? As in, are they things which anyone can relatively easily achieve but choose not to or are they things which are more rigid like genetics? I am asking standards, not wants. Standards can be defined as wants you are not willing to negotiate much on, wants more as things you would prefer but can afford to not have. Standards should also mean that if a partner satisfies your basic standards they should be datable and considered datable.

Apparently the prespective is guys are more lose with their standards and would be will to date more or less anyone decent (even if they are not perticularly good looking or physically attractive), but girls are more selective. I am not sure I have much of an opinion so asking you guys...
Just to add to the question, what are the things you can't compromise on?

Inspired by my chat/conversation with @thatsamazing

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DtDT3QZ-6u0

theconversation.com/incel-violence-is-a-form-of-extremism-its-time-we-treated-it-as-a-security-threat-138536

What is your opinion on how incel violence should be dealt with? Personally I think they do fit the terrorism definition. But like the article says treating them that way may only make the problem worse. And what about the ones who are still redeemable? What should be done to prevent more incel violence?

Before it comes up, no I'm not an incel, I disagree with that world view. This question isn't for debating incel theories but for ideas on how to handle the growing threat of incel violence. I made poll options but I realize public opinion may be far more complex on this issue than just a simple poll feel free to add your opinion if you don't see something that fits your view in the poll.

The Trump administration released new guidelines Wednesday for how universities and K-12 schools should handle complaints of sexual assault and misconduct as part of a contentious overhaul that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos launched in 2017.

Now, under reworked federal rules, alleged student perpetrators will have added protections, including the presumption that they are innocent throughout the disciplinary process and the right to be provided all evidence collected against them. Those students can also cross-examine their accusers and vice versa during live hearings, although it must be done through a lawyer or representative.

Under the Obama administration, the definition of sexual harassment was less specific — described as "unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature."

But the meaning has become narrower, using the Supreme Court's definition of harassment. The misconduct must fall under certain categories, including unwelcome conduct that is "so severe, pervasive and objectively offensive" that it "denies a person equal access to the school's education program or activity."

The way i see it, the current rules suck, all a woman... and yes its only women in college that have this power.. All a women need do is make the accusation. She needs no evidence, she needs no proof, no witnesses, nothing, and the accused is expelled from school. The most evil part of this, there were stories about a man who was passed out drunk, and he woke up to a girl having sex with him, he made a report, and was expelled, because the girls report had more merit even though he had witnesses and the like.. There are literally thousands of law suites against these schools because they failed to obey due process.. I see this as a welcome change.

As always attached is a direct link to the new rules going into effect August 12th.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/titleix-regs-unofficial.pdf