Your text presents an argument that in general, men speak in report form while women speak in rapport form.
Do you find this to be true in your life experiences? If so, provide at least 2 examples. If you don't find the "report" versus "rapport" speak to be an accurate representation of how men and women speak, why not? Provide at least 2 examples.
Do you believe that the way that men and women speak changes over their lifetime?

I do believe that this is generally true across most populations. An example would be that of people in the workplace. Male leaders are usually more likely to "report" instructions to their subordinates. They generally give instructions that do not take into account the subordinates' wishes in a significant way. When women are in positions of power, they are more likely to care about the subordinates' thinking or feelings. This can lead to better outcomes, as well as worse ones, depending on the situation.

Another example is parenting. In general, women are more likely to want to build "rapport" with their children through communication. On the other hand, fathers are more likely to communicate information as a "report," and bond in other, less communicative ways.

I do believe that the way people speak changes over their lifetime. Both men and women are more concerned with "rapport" in their early life, particularly in childhood and during their teenage years. The differences in communication between the two genders, however, becomes clearer afterwards.

no,

explanation:

because they are likely to use their corrupted thought process to get what they want. not what is better for the another reason they shouldn't is since they abused their rights as a us citizen they should have certain rights stripped away from them as punishment, such as the right to vote. due to the lack of proper behavior exemplified   from their actions , it would be hard for people to trust them because of their criminal record.   either directly (in the case of a referendum or ballot initiative) or indirectly (by choosing lawmakers and law enforcers). in fact, we do have certain minimum, objective standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that we require people to meet before they are given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. people who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards. and those crimes can include such “non-violent felonies” as, say, treason and espionage, or voter fraud and public corruption, white-collar crime and felonies merely “concerning drugs” — like trafficking in fentanyl-laced heroin and selling it to minors, for example. if you’re not willing to follow the law, then you should not have a role in making the law for everyone else.

his face was as red as an