This is not funny and any man wearing this would probably not pass a similar test using any woman's criteria. If I saw someone wearing this my first thought would certainly not be "hey this is a guy with a great sense of humor and I would like to hang with him!".
I constantly meet asian developers (Singapore , India, China, etc) with this edgelord personality. They come to American conferences and meetups, say some wild sexist shit, and someone has to politely let them know not to.
Some backtrack. Some apologize. Some literally freeze up and pretend like it didn't happen.
Many of my guy coworkers have been (and are) sort of misogynistic, and homophobic (I'm in India). It makes me really uncomfortable. Might start reporting people to HR one day.
We do still live in a bubble in the west. We're fighting for equity across genders and race, while some parts of the world are still questioning if sexual harassment against women at work is really that big of a deal.
Ah, but if we care at all about normalization and that's calculatable from the other columns (it should be) then it shouldn't be a column. Unless it's expensive and this is a view, of course.
Why is there a separate table for men and women in the first place? Shouldn't there be a person table with a many to many relationship with itself (because polyamory exists)?
To that point a person table with a relationship table. So this way you can reference relationship between two or more persons within the relationship table and that could be joined to the person table if needed. I don't think you'd really be able to keep it within one table while exploring multiple relationships unless you're storing a list of ids that is interpreted outside of sql. Also a relationship table would allow exploring other types of relationships such as exes, love interests, coworkers, family, friends, etc
Yeah it'd be a person table, and the relationship table indicating the ids of shipped couples. Do you think there'd need to be a status in the relationship table so we can tombstone exes? Or maybe started and ended date columns for each relationship so we can figure out whose cheating on who. But when about on-off relationships then? How would we model Ross and Rachel?
From there you don't need a rel.status because you're not updating this rel.id entry except for the rel.end. if they started dating again later it would be a whole new entry, and then you could query their entire dating history to see if they keep coming back to the same person, dating around, playing the field, etc. Separately there could be a friendship relationship that is tracked so you could if they ended being friends after a breakup.
Maybe it's supposed to imply that boyfriend is an attribute of the particular girl. Like saying she isn't someone's boyfriend. It's probably a holdover from the original data architecture and nobody ever bothered to modify the table later on in case there's a select somewhere that expects that field to exist.
That structure doesn't handle polyamorous and cheating relationships very well. It should probably have and (select top 1 1 from dbo.relationships r where r.partner_a != GIRLS.id or r.partner_b != GIRLS.id) which would handle also LGBT+ relationships or relationships that are better represented as a graph.
The relationships table should also have enum for relationship type. It might be friends, family, platonic relations etc.
Also might want to check sex_drive to handle ace gals and something to do with kinsey scale not to bother lesbians.
LinkedinLunatics
Newest