Evelyn "Spooky" Olansky, Transgender-at-large

It's pretty classic fascism - if the transes have ever succeeded, it was because they were helped and or/cheated. If the transes have ever failed, it was only because of the efforts of those brave TERFs.

Trans is simultaneously dangerously ascendant and doomed to fail

I loved Lower Decks and Prodigy. Why not target the gap in the age demo and make a show about pseudo-teens?

oh, oh oh oh

But we haven't ruled out the possibility that everyone's basic needs could be met, while what you're suggesting is inevitable is one that BY DESIGN tries to distribute inequity to so-called deserving parties.

Person #1 - Elon Musk

or not the kind of high profile you meant?

Can you articulate a definition of 'taking systemic advantage' that doesn't also justify taxing the rich, or are we creating a standard that arbitrarily only applies to the poor?

Or we could provide an appropriate living situation for everybody and stop worrying about if somebody is morally permitted to be less productive than the ruling class expects.

*Hundreds of years of white men exclusively holding instructor's role, frequently to coerce sex*

Can we even be sure this problem is really happening? We mustn't act rashly

*The first generation of openly trans instructors arrives*

They flicked you off, so now flunking them is political overreach

*Hundreds of years of white men exclusively holding instructor's role, frequently to coerce sex*

Can we even be sure this problem is really happening? We mustn't act rashly

*The first generation of openly trans instructors arrives*

I flicked you off, so now flunking me is political overreach

Foo Fighters, HIV Deniers A platinum-selling alt-rock group may be endangering their fans by promoting a dangerous myth.

If you've made it to the end of this thread, my only request is that you share it with others. So many people suffered because of this denialism, and it frankly burns me up that this dark legacy has been made to disappear without a fuss.
www.motherjones.com/politics/200...

"My gain is worth sacrificing a very specific someone's job, and I do not care why that particular person's job was so tenuous" is ideological

this image immediately brought to mind that ridiculous oval office meeting where a room full of grimly smiling white guys bullied Ukraine's PM Zelensky about his wardrobe

the chin sculptor, scratching their head, trying to puzzle out why the chisel just keeps sliding off in a random direction

"MLK Jr tailored his activism to a now bygone media environment" is so deeply just how modern dems have narrativized his efforts in modern terms, as though his genius was knowing civil rights were a winning issue, as opposed to insisting on a right to basic standard of living and equality.

Not arguing worse or better. Just troubling the absolute bonkers notion that media was once unified and impartial in truth telling, and that only now do we have reasons to distrust.

The media seemed better at a time when we only asked white folks to judge it.

To say it was a factor is not the same as it being the intent. The intent of anti-civil rights news coverage was to invalidate the movement -- just because that historically backfired doesn't mean the media were demonstrating impartiality.

Faith in those has collapsed certainly, but you've misapprehended the process.

Media "seemed stable" when white ppl were the only allowed stakeholders. As media has considered other groups, bigots have decided to stop trusting media seeking non-white cishet stakeholders. Now we have fracture

the long lost media that stood for fact and truth:

"Known terrorist MLK Jr attempted to foment another riot this week. This is CBS News"

after all, the list of true progressives in descending order goes from John Brown on down

each one for a different tier of intensity. i might do many a thing for the love of God, but I would move heaven and earth for the love of one single pooch

wasn't a soldier from brass to barracks wouldn't line up for curtain duty

Idk about you, but "the government wants to control what kind of clothes you wear and what types of people get to use medicine" feels like a pretty clear and evident issue for everyone.

A govt that can make a trans person change clothes can make you change clothes too.

The problem is that Dems can't seem to articulate trans rights as an issue of general liberty. They know how to talk about it as a virtue signal, but not a seriously red flag for everyone who enjoys liberty.

They really SHOULD be able to articulate it, if trans rights weren't just a token to play

One of my favorite things is getting to tell friends who are new to NYC that the subway "stand clear of the closing doors please" voice is a trans woman named Bernie Wagenblast and she's amazing.

There's a subtle eugenicist impulse inherent to population-level statistics. Acts that ppl couldn't stand to do with their own hands become quasi-reasonable. It leads to nonsense implications, like individual legal status toggling positive/negative cultural contribution.

Monoliths, though definitionally monolithic, are also not a monolith

I think the only satisfactory answer is to not try. Leave the Skywalker saga with Williams. For stories to feel new, they may also need to sound new

As a means of improving quality of life for autistic people (like actually asking what they need and want to making sure the work contributes to that)? Sure.

As a discrete point in time, at which some hypothetical action could have been taken to prevent autism? No, that's eugenics.