The longer Trump remains in power, more darkly humorous (and depressing, and infuriating) all the "it's not the end of the world" type of downplaying of him becomming the president gets.
Yes, it could have been worse, and it has gotten worse everyday since.
And it will keep getting worse until there is a congress willing to stop him.
Even just looking at fairly recent history, Reagan didn't need to send gay people to literal death camps to do as little as possible about the AIDS crisis and get a lot of people killed as a result.
there's an entire missing generation of trans women and gay men
like, just a big hole where a lot of people should be
Miss me? Find me on:
Twitch (I stream most days of the week) Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
Every time I go to a public restroom here that is it’s own fully enclosed room (toilet, sink, would qualify as a half bath in a home listing) and a lockable door, which has a gender specific designation, I wonder WHY
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
We also associate locker rooms with sexual assault. We think you're only safe with your pants fastened.
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
I was really shocked to learn that the reason that toilet stall doors in the U.S. have a huge gap at the bottom is so that cops can see if gay men are having sex in them. Like, this was enough of a concern that manufacturers changed the design in the U.S., and police used to have special units that did nothing but patrol public restrooms to arrest them.
Should we consider someone a bigot if they support trans rights, but would never be in a relationship or even find a trans person attractive or as a valid mate simply because they are trans?
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
We also associate locker rooms with sexual assault. We think you're only safe with your pants fastened.
And thinking you're safe with your pants on represents decades of progress on the matter. When I was a kid, grown ass adults would warn kids with a straight face that if they hang around with people who act weird, they might catch gay. And well into the 90's, it was a standard popular culture trope that gay guys never pursued other gay guys, but incessantly hounded a straight man of choice until they turned.
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
We also associate locker rooms with sexual assault. We think you're only safe with your pants fastened.
And thinking you're safe with your pants on represents decades of progress on the matter. When I was a kid, grown ass adults would warn kids with a straight face that if they hang around with people who act weird, they might catch gay. And well into the 90's, it was a standard popular culture trope that gay guys never pursued other gay guys, but incessantly hounded a straight man of choice until they turned.
This particular brand of homophobia is derived from the fear that straight men will be treated the way they treat women
+28
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
We also associate locker rooms with sexual assault. We think you're only safe with your pants fastened.
To be fair, school locker rooms can be fucking awful places
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
I was really shocked to learn that the reason that toilet stall doors in the U.S. have a huge gap at the bottom is so that cops can see if gay men are having sex in them. Like, this was enough of a concern that manufacturers changed the design in the U.S., and police used to have special units that did nothing but patrol public restrooms to arrest them.
Please tell me this is some urban legend. Somebody?
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
I was really shocked to learn that the reason that toilet stall doors in the U.S. have a huge gap at the bottom is so that cops can see if gay men are having sex in them. Like, this was enough of a concern that manufacturers changed the design in the U.S., and police used to have special units that did nothing but patrol public restrooms to arrest them.
Please tell me this is some urban legend. Somebody?
It is. There's no one reason for toilet stall gaps. It's for ease of cleaning, for keeping people from doing drugs/having sex in the stalls, for people to get out if the latch jams, for safety if someone passes out in the stall (easier to notice from outside this way).
Re: the special police units, no idea, but I wouldn't be surprised. Somebody says something shitty about cops, I tend to believe it.
I'm pretty sure the cops in LA during the 70's and 80's were explicitly running entrapment rings on public bathrooms trying to catch gay people so they could fine them.
Americans are weirdly obsessed with toilets. In the UK, if you use the wrong toilet I don’t feel like it’s a huge deal, especially if it’s a private single toilet like you get in restaurants and you are using it because there’s a huge mess in the other one.
I was really shocked to learn that the reason that toilet stall doors in the U.S. have a huge gap at the bottom is so that cops can see if gay men are having sex in them. Like, this was enough of a concern that manufacturers changed the design in the U.S., and police used to have special units that did nothing but patrol public restrooms to arrest them.
Please tell me this is some urban legend. Somebody?
It is. There's no one reason for toilet stall gaps. It's for ease of cleaning, for keeping people from doing drugs/having sex in the stalls, for people to get out if the latch jams, for safety if someone passes out in the stall (easier to notice from outside this way).
Re: the special police units, no idea, but I wouldn't be surprised. Somebody says something shitty about cops, I tend to believe it.
You can also make more doors with the same material if they a foot shorter.
I'm pretty sure the cops in LA during the 70's and 80's were explicitly running entrapment rings on public bathrooms trying to catch gay people so they could fine them.
This was a nation wide thing. In any good sized city, your local police would run sting operations a couple of times of week to a couple times of month at the known cruising areas. Different officers would act as bait and pretty much arrest anyone they'd interact with. If you asked for something, if you didn't ask, if you looked at them sideways, or for anything they'd like to make up. Hell, in NYC officers were known to follow people from bar to bar in order to get someone to buy them a drink since that could be used as evidence of "solicitation". This policing habit came about post WW2 and was pushed by the more conservative side who saw the horrors of war and reacted by creating the so-called nuclear family model.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
BREAKING: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to rule businesses can discriminate against workers based on their sexual orientation, gender identity without violating federal law.
I imagine that as the elections draw closer, and doubly so if the results are strongly in Democrats favour, that between now and the time until the next congress takes their seats, we may see a rush of utter bullshit.
They have the clout now, and if there's a hint it might go away, I guess they'd see no reason not to open the floodgates. Ideally they'll be punished for it, but after previous experiences I am following the Pod Save America guys and getting out of the prediction business.
But seriously, voting people into place to combat and stem this fuckmuppetry needs to be hammered into everyone's heads.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
BREAKING: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to rule businesses can discriminate against workers based on their sexual orientation, gender identity without violating federal law.
If you're firing a trans-man or woman for not looking a certain way, I feel like you're setting a precedent that just as easily applies to cis-gendered people who don't look a certain way.
This is a great and well considered plan.
Yes, I realize the real plan involves five hypocrites in black robes
+4
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
Or they'll just rule the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which I think is the operative law, unconstitutional. Or at least render it unenforceable. Because that's what they really want.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
BREAKING: Justice Department asks Supreme Court to rule businesses can discriminate against workers based on their sexual orientation, gender identity without violating federal law.
If you're firing a trans-man or woman for not looking a certain way, I feel like you're setting a precedent that just as easily applies to cis-gendered people who don't look a certain way.
This is a great and well considered plan.
Yes, I realize the real plan involves five hypocrites in black robes
It was literally a discrimination case brought by a cis-woman who was fired for not dressing/behaving "womanly enough" that started the enormous pile of court precedent concerning how discrimination on the basis of sex means more than narrowest, bad-faith reading of the phrase.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
You can't "by your logic" out of this because they don't care. As long as they hold power it will be safety for them and anxiety and persecution for everyone else.
+20
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2018
Sometimes you can't do anything in good faith and just have to heavy-handedly put something into effect. In this case, tough shit for people who don't like LGBTQUIA people. They are here, they're going to work and live just as you do, and you can't do shit to them. That's a message I'd like to hear more than "well gee golly," because "gee golly" hasn't been working.
Edit - To be clear, I'm talking about legislative and court ruling solutions. There is no appealing to morality or using logic in this fight.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
They keep whistling Dixie, and people keep pretending it's the pledge of allegiance.
You can probably take that as a summary of the problem:
The GOP has an actual end goal in mind and works to make it happen.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, still thinks the field is this parliamentary, wonky thing they have to follow through on, slowness and inability to effect change be damned. And this doesn't even begin to acknowledge the problem that for many of them, this is an issue that doesn't effect them, they sit above the fray, safe and sound in their personal lives while their colleagues prepare to hurt as many people as they can, obfuscating it all through the supposed indifference of the law and encouraging their base to do worse.
Until they can figure out that's not how the systems at play actually work, innocent and defenseless folks are going to suffer.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
They keep whistling Dixie, and people keep pretending it's the pledge of allegiance.
Trump wants our client’s victory overturned and trans people excluded from federal civil rights law. We won in lower courts and will keep fighting for Aimee Stephens as long as it takes. We filed briefs today asking SCOTUS not to entertain the government’s hate-filled position.
The way oppression works in the US is a lot like Emperor Palpatine dissolving the Senate and letting the Moffs govern their sectors directly. Let local and state governments do whatever they want, leave no room for appeal to a higher authority.
Just hope that blue states don't get Death Starred.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The way oppression works in the US is a lot like Emperor Palpatine dissolving the Senate and letting the Moffs govern their sectors directly. Let local and state governments do whatever they want, leave no rooms for appeal to a higher authority.
Just hope that blue states don't get Death Starred.
There's an addendum. If the states try to do something not-Republican when the Federal government leaves the space open, then you mobilize the Federal government to stop it. See: the net neutrality stuff going on. God only knows how this will play out if anti-discrimination laws hit the state-by-state level.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
Meanwhile, Miracle Hill is discriminating with impunity. Beth Lesser, a Jewish parent with 18 years of experience fostering children, was told that not only that she couldn’t foster children from Miracle Hill but she couldn’t even serve as a mentor.
“I’ve never felt that sort of discrimination before,” Lesser told The Intercept. Miracle Hill is also using the foster care system to program children, she said.
“What Miracle Hill does, is they scoop up these kids from foster care, and they have these group homes. And then once they get the kids in there, their whole objective is to indoctrinate them into their brand of Christianity,” Lesser said.
“I think that if Trump knew about this in detail, he wouldn’t be for it,” Lesser said. “Because he’s not a religious nut.” She’s a proud supporter of the president — and, she offered, she wanted Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed.
She’s a proud supporter of the president
"I never thought these lions would eat my face!"
It's just as dumb every time I hear people say that...
its like every one of them is responding to Trump as if they are looking at a Rorschach ink blot test, when in reality theyre looking at a very detailed photograph of dog shit
Relevant to this issue, for the second time in a row a company most of us have bought products from, GOG/CDPR, makers of the Witcher and the upcoming Cyberpunk game, have made a transphobic joke on their twitter. They've also made pro-GG posts.
The recent time was by posting an "ad" coopting the #wontbeerased hashtag.
Relevant to this issue, for the second time in a row a company most of us have bought products from, GOG/CDPR, makers of the Witcher and the upcoming Cyberpunk game, have made a transphobic joke on their twitter. They've also made pro-GG posts.
The recent time was by posting an "ad" coopting the #wontbeerased hashtag.
That community manager really needed to be shown the door months ago (hey, 12+ still technically counts as "months ago"). Especially since it seems that community manager (or managers) just lost them a contract: https://www.pcgamer.com/gog-pulls-insensitive-tweet-says-it-should-focus-on-games/ (the "Update" section details Zombie Orpheus Entertainment pulling their content from GOG)
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
Relevant to this issue, for the second time in a row a company most of us have bought products from, GOG/CDPR, makers of the Witcher and the upcoming Cyberpunk game, have made a transphobic joke on their twitter. They've also made pro-GG posts.
The recent time was by posting an "ad" coopting the #wontbeerased hashtag.
That community manager really needed to be shown the door months ago (hey, 12+ still technically counts as "months ago"). Especially since it seems that community manager (or managers) just lost them a contract: https://www.pcgamer.com/gog-pulls-insensitive-tweet-says-it-should-focus-on-games/ (the "Update" section details Zombie Orpheus Entertainment pulling their content from GOG)
One might start to assume that the majority of the Polish company, a fairly right wing country, agrees with the community manager when they don't show them the door after over a year of this shit. Oh, and also some games with pretty shitty portrayals of women and broader human rights subjects.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
see - the gutting of the VRA
coming soon - the gutting of the CRA
Then it's onto the real goal, repealing the 14th which is the cause of all this ruckus in the first place. That funny law that just lets anyone born here be a citizen and then says we can't write laws which treat them differently than us good ol' boys.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
And this misses the point that, if anything is ever going to matter again, and this all goes as we fear, then getting SCOTUS to go on record ASAP contradicting itself to favor a cis person will matter.
I mean, in a world where that actually gets approved by the SCOTUS, it isn't going to take long for a cis person to be wrongly fired for that, and then the legal battle that will follow will probably bring us back to where we are? That or it'll lead to gross intrusive body inspections by employers?
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
And this misses the point that, if anything is ever going to matter again, and this all goes as we fear, then getting SCOTUS to go on record ASAP contradicting itself to favor a cis person will matter.
This is a thing that matters to you, because you believe in a democratic law-administered social order that was primarily defined in the mid to late 20th century, thanks to a progressive Court and years of literal blood and sweat poured out by activists fighting for change throughout the century.
This is a thing that your opponents do not care about. The law is not meant, in their eyes, to bind them, but to bind others on their behalf. To keep these others out of sight, out of power and, when and where your opponents are benefited by it, exploitable.
Your “prove them to be hypocrites” case will not work, because the people with the power do not care. As ostensible a democracy as this country is supposed to be, power is rapidly coelescing, politically and financially, in the hands of the GOP thanks to understanding how to manipulate the systems that make up American society. Control enough localities and you can create gerrymanders that give you seats despite more democratic votes collectively against you. Block enough court appointments and then when you’re in charge you can appoint your favorable judges instead. Create an economy where more and more labor is seen as replaceable cogs and Capital holders as the vital core of industry and people will be too busy just trying to make enough money to survive to care about politics.
When bad actors control the system, it is practically impossible to use the system against them, because theyre at the controls.
What’s more, in this specific case? Congratulations, you’ve just provided a massive propaganda boon to the right wing by being a liberal forcing a man to be stereotypically effeminate. And this is without even getting into the fucking pandora’s box that is “what is ‘not looking enough like a trans woman’?” and the blowback against trans people that idea carries with it.
your idea is bad at multiple levels, and while I recognize your desperation to help, you’re basically saying “why don’t I use a flamethrower on that monster, while we all are here in this room flooded with flammable gas?”
Posts
No, safety tolerances are just relaxed as far as they need to be to bring 3r into range. Enjoy air travel!
Is that you, B.S. Johnson?
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
there's an entire missing generation of trans women and gay men
like, just a big hole where a lot of people should be
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Every time I go to a public restroom here that is it’s own fully enclosed room (toilet, sink, would qualify as a half bath in a home listing) and a lockable door, which has a gender specific designation, I wonder WHY
We also associate locker rooms with sexual assault. We think you're only safe with your pants fastened.
I was really shocked to learn that the reason that toilet stall doors in the U.S. have a huge gap at the bottom is so that cops can see if gay men are having sex in them. Like, this was enough of a concern that manufacturers changed the design in the U.S., and police used to have special units that did nothing but patrol public restrooms to arrest them.
yes
And thinking you're safe with your pants on represents decades of progress on the matter. When I was a kid, grown ass adults would warn kids with a straight face that if they hang around with people who act weird, they might catch gay. And well into the 90's, it was a standard popular culture trope that gay guys never pursued other gay guys, but incessantly hounded a straight man of choice until they turned.
This particular brand of homophobia is derived from the fear that straight men will be treated the way they treat women
To be fair, school locker rooms can be fucking awful places
Please tell me this is some urban legend. Somebody?
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
It is. There's no one reason for toilet stall gaps. It's for ease of cleaning, for keeping people from doing drugs/having sex in the stalls, for people to get out if the latch jams, for safety if someone passes out in the stall (easier to notice from outside this way).
Re: the special police units, no idea, but I wouldn't be surprised. Somebody says something shitty about cops, I tend to believe it.
You can also make more doors with the same material if they a foot shorter.
This was a nation wide thing. In any good sized city, your local police would run sting operations a couple of times of week to a couple times of month at the known cruising areas. Different officers would act as bait and pretty much arrest anyone they'd interact with. If you asked for something, if you didn't ask, if you looked at them sideways, or for anything they'd like to make up. Hell, in NYC officers were known to follow people from bar to bar in order to get someone to buy them a drink since that could be used as evidence of "solicitation". This policing habit came about post WW2 and was pushed by the more conservative side who saw the horrors of war and reacted by creating the so-called nuclear family model.
They have the clout now, and if there's a hint it might go away, I guess they'd see no reason not to open the floodgates. Ideally they'll be punished for it, but after previous experiences I am following the Pod Save America guys and getting out of the prediction business.
But seriously, voting people into place to combat and stem this fuckmuppetry needs to be hammered into everyone's heads.
If you're firing a trans-man or woman for not looking a certain way, I feel like you're setting a precedent that just as easily applies to cis-gendered people who don't look a certain way.
This is a great and well considered plan.
I want to believe there's a progressive business owner somewhere who would be willing to hire an alt-right cis-man just for the purposes of firing them for not looking enough like a trans-woman, just to bait the case.
If you can discriminate based on gender expression, you can discriminate based on gender expression; right?
It was literally a discrimination case brought by a cis-woman who was fired for not dressing/behaving "womanly enough" that started the enormous pile of court precedent concerning how discrimination on the basis of sex means more than narrowest, bad-faith reading of the phrase.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I feel this maybe ignores the point that
like
the people in question do not care about logic and constitutional coherency.
It's about the exercise of power, to reshape the country how they want it to be.
If they can use the law to do it, they'll use the law as their weapon. If the law works against them, they'll find a loophole or enough of an obfuscation to get around it.
We are not dealing with people who actually rely on legal consistency. We are dealing with people who have an endgoal in mind and use what's available to get there.
You can't "by your logic" out of this because they don't care. As long as they hold power it will be safety for them and anxiety and persecution for everyone else.
Edit - To be clear, I'm talking about legislative and court ruling solutions. There is no appealing to morality or using logic in this fight.
They keep whistling Dixie, and people keep pretending it's the pledge of allegiance.
The GOP has an actual end goal in mind and works to make it happen.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, still thinks the field is this parliamentary, wonky thing they have to follow through on, slowness and inability to effect change be damned. And this doesn't even begin to acknowledge the problem that for many of them, this is an issue that doesn't effect them, they sit above the fray, safe and sound in their personal lives while their colleagues prepare to hurt as many people as they can, obfuscating it all through the supposed indifference of the law and encouraging their base to do worse.
Until they can figure out that's not how the systems at play actually work, innocent and defenseless folks are going to suffer.
See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/10/22/feature/some-white-northerners-want-to-redefine-a-flag-rooted-in-racism-as-a-symbol-of-patriotism/?utm_term=.4e401fbb0f37
Or, even when literally covering a gathering of German Neo-Nazis: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/world/europe/germany-far-right-neo-nazi.html
Just hope that blue states don't get Death Starred.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
see - the gutting of the VRA
coming soon - the gutting of the CRA
its like every one of them is responding to Trump as if they are looking at a Rorschach ink blot test, when in reality theyre looking at a very detailed photograph of dog shit
The recent time was by posting an "ad" coopting the #wontbeerased hashtag.
https://kotaku.com/gog-account-publishes-yet-another-awful-tweet-1829939458
That community manager really needed to be shown the door months ago (hey, 12+ still technically counts as "months ago"). Especially since it seems that community manager (or managers) just lost them a contract: https://www.pcgamer.com/gog-pulls-insensitive-tweet-says-it-should-focus-on-games/ (the "Update" section details Zombie Orpheus Entertainment pulling their content from GOG)
One might start to assume that the majority of the Polish company, a fairly right wing country, agrees with the community manager when they don't show them the door after over a year of this shit. Oh, and also some games with pretty shitty portrayals of women and broader human rights subjects.
Then it's onto the real goal, repealing the 14th which is the cause of all this ruckus in the first place. That funny law that just lets anyone born here be a citizen and then says we can't write laws which treat them differently than us good ol' boys.
And this misses the point that, if anything is ever going to matter again, and this all goes as we fear, then getting SCOTUS to go on record ASAP contradicting itself to favor a cis person will matter.
This is a thing that matters to you, because you believe in a democratic law-administered social order that was primarily defined in the mid to late 20th century, thanks to a progressive Court and years of literal blood and sweat poured out by activists fighting for change throughout the century.
This is a thing that your opponents do not care about. The law is not meant, in their eyes, to bind them, but to bind others on their behalf. To keep these others out of sight, out of power and, when and where your opponents are benefited by it, exploitable.
Your “prove them to be hypocrites” case will not work, because the people with the power do not care. As ostensible a democracy as this country is supposed to be, power is rapidly coelescing, politically and financially, in the hands of the GOP thanks to understanding how to manipulate the systems that make up American society. Control enough localities and you can create gerrymanders that give you seats despite more democratic votes collectively against you. Block enough court appointments and then when you’re in charge you can appoint your favorable judges instead. Create an economy where more and more labor is seen as replaceable cogs and Capital holders as the vital core of industry and people will be too busy just trying to make enough money to survive to care about politics.
When bad actors control the system, it is practically impossible to use the system against them, because theyre at the controls.
What’s more, in this specific case? Congratulations, you’ve just provided a massive propaganda boon to the right wing by being a liberal forcing a man to be stereotypically effeminate. And this is without even getting into the fucking pandora’s box that is “what is ‘not looking enough like a trans woman’?” and the blowback against trans people that idea carries with it.
your idea is bad at multiple levels, and while I recognize your desperation to help, you’re basically saying “why don’t I use a flamethrower on that monster, while we all are here in this room flooded with flammable gas?”