Schadrach

Part of it is that various states require that all candidates already be registered before now, so it’s Biden or bust in those states - they can’t swap him for a different candidate on the ballots there and they can’t officially transfer any pledged electoral votes for him either if he wins.

There are enough such states to win Trump the election if they go to him essentially by default. And if they all went to Biden despite Biden stepping down then we’d be in a one vote per state election between the top candidates, which leads to a Trump win.

Mindjourney can make incredible images, but it can’t make art.

Mostly because you’re defining “art” in such a way that being produced by MidJourney disqualifies it automatically.

I mean her case was investigated and he was freed to leave the country afterward. It didn’t come back with a vengeance until it could be used as a means to put him where the US could get at him.

H1B skilled worker visas. You have to prove that you tried to hire locally and couldn’t find anyone qualified. The whole point is that the qualifications are impossible, so you are either under qualified or lying. Since no qualified candidate exists, you can bring someone over from overseas and hold the risk of being deported if you fire them over their heads - and you suddenly get less thorough about checking qualifications for your immigrant candidates.

The first name.that came.to my mind for someone like that was Hugo Schwyzer (I’m probably spelling that wrong) - he was very much a very outspoken feminist who made a point of drawing attention to how feminist he was at every opportunity. He was also a women’s studies professor.

Honestly, some of his writing gave me the vibe of what it would sound like if you were a recovering addict and chose feminism as the higher power in your 12 step program.

Eventually it comes out that he nearly decided to murder-suicide an ex, and that he was a women’s studies professor because it gave him access to an ever rotating stable of young, impressionable women to hook up with.

When he admitted to all that the wording again reminded me of 12 step program talk, like he was taking steps 5-7 publicly online because online feminism was the God he believed in for the program. It…didn’t get the response I think he hoped for. Less absolution and more ostracism and banishment.

I actually had someone whose family member died of Covid tell me that his brother-in-law didn’t really die of Covid, he died of something else, because it’s all overblown and the hospitals are doing a similar scam to this myth (i.e. making it out as a bigger deal than it needs to be.)

That sort of thing goes around here a lot too, usually framed in terms of “He didn’t die of COVID, but if you die from any cause whatsoever while you also have COVID they’ll count it as dying of COVID to make the COVID numbers bigger.” It usually falls apart when you ask why they want the COVID numbers to be bigger than they really are.

We always have been, it’s just that the begging started out looking like math and has gradually gotten more abstract over time. We’ve just reached the point where we’ve explained to it in mathematical terms how to let us beg in natural language in certain narrow contexts.

That’s exactly what I was thinking. I’m totally fine with about half of the directions given, and the rest are baking in right wing talking points.

It must be confusing to be told to be unbiased, but also to adopt specific biases like that. Also, I find it amusing to tell it not to repeat any part of the prompt under any circumstances but also to tell it specifically what to say under certain circumstances, which would require repeating that part of the prompt.

No the rhetoric is just different, more transparently objectifying; ‘protect the titties’ discourse. TERFs talk about them as ‘mutilated sisters’ or some shit, because its still about tge myystical divine feminine bullshit to them. You hear it more direct from patriarchy than from its proxies.

1. Rarely about trans men, not never. The dialogue is mostly framed in terms of men being a predatory danger to women so taht women need spaces where men are kept away from them and men being such predatory monsters that they will pretend to be women in order to get access to their prey. This is more or less the standard TERF (and amusingly also the right-wing tradcon) perspective. They don’t even really hide it.

2. It feels like you’re just jumbling things up here - if the core premise is that men are better than women and trans people disrupt the patriarchal hierarchy, why wouldn’t the focus be mostly on trans men, framed in terms of them trying to steal patriarchal power for themselves rather than mostly focusing on trans women being framed as predatory “men in dresses” using gender identity claims to have easier access to their prey?

You’re reading a little transphobic and under informed on the topic here

Transphobic how? By not accepting your interpretation of transphobic arguments that requires ignoring the actual arguments made in favor of all transphobia just being that trans people represent a disruption of a patriarchal gender hierarchy? Because that doesn’t really align to basically any transphobic arguments that transphobes actually make. It requires ignoring what transphobes actually say almost entirely.

When people tell you what they believe, it’s usually better to believe them. They generally have the better view of both what they believe and why they justify those beliefs.

Oh yeah fuck you stop talking to me.

For what, drawing an explicit difference between sex and gender? Or am I supposed to pretend now that there is no difference - there is only gender?

Its that she hates women, or thinks women are inferior to men. You see this with all terfs.

No, she doesn’t. You just operate from a (shockingly common) perspective in which any case where anything gender-related that doesn’t conform to your particular flavor of progressive feminism must collapse into misogyny.

She literally just believes that men are evil monsters who will do whatever they have to to prey on innocent-by-default women. Including pretend to be women if needed to get to their prey. It’s like the white supremacists who believe black folks are inherently criminal, violent monsters except with men instead of blacks.

So she invented some magical bullshit about why she was a full person.

She’s never believed she wasn’t, or needed to invent magical bullshit to believe she is, at least related to gender. She just needs to believe that men are evil monsters who will pretend to be women to attack “real” women, which is shockingly common.

But the magical bullshit is magic; doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Which trans people inherently bring/are.

Her problem isn’t that she sees trans people as fuzzing up her hierarchy in which men are superior to her.

There’s a reason why transphobic dialog is rarely about trans men (despite them also violating the same “magical bullshit”), and very often framed in terms of “men in dresses”, and that’s because it is most often about how men are monsters and women need to be protected from them, and trans women are forever tainted by the original sin of having been born male sexed.

Meh, I’ve been able to do all of those in modded Minecraft for years.

I mean, there’s one case of this in the US already - child support. It’s the only debt you can be jailed for failing to pay.

Uhhh “based” is mostly home the mods that nexus removes and are re-uploaded there because they promote bigoted or intolerant ideology.

For anyone who’s curious what this means exactly, we’re talking about things like mods that remove pride flags, mods that replace body type 1/2 or a/b with sex identifiers, mods that restore content cut from the initial release of games for other regions, a weird scattering of lewd mods, one mod that adds child conscripts to M&B2, one that restores the cut Notch and /v/ splashes to Minecraft and removes the BLM and COVID ones that replaced them, that sort of thing.

It very literally is not. If you’re referring to “free speech”, that’s a whole other thing.

Yes it is. Hate speech is often used as the quintessential example of speech that is objectionable but still protected under the First Amendment.

About the only exception is incitement to an imminent lawless act. And the bar for that is very high. Like “Someone should round up all the $SLURs and string them up!” is probably not incitement in the US. Pretty much anything shy of “You guys, go string up that $SLUR over there, before he gets away!” is going to come short of incitement. You basically have to be directing people to do something illegal in short order.

I’m all for celebrating Trump’s death as a federal holiday. We can even call it Trump day. The traditional celebration should of course be a mass exodus to go piss on his grave. Make effigies of him to burn for the folks that can’t make the trip, and then piss on those to put them out.

Does it require the public display be offensive, or just that it be a public display? If the latter, then playing Wolfenstein on your laptop anywhere but a private residence is punishable by up to a year in prison.

In order to decree this unconstitutional, SCOTUS would have to make a majority decision that what Trump did doesn’t fall under insurrection.

No, they wouldn’t. They would just have to accept a due process argument, essentially that the opinion of a CO state judge is not the appropriate venue or process for determining if someone is an insurrectionist. Probably calling for either Congress or criminal courts to establish that.

This is notably different than the CSA, as CSA officers were openly and publicly members of an organization that openly and publicly waged a war against the US.

This is what the MI court basically said. They left the challenge open for the general election qualifications.

I honestly think they were right on this. Ultimately the primary is an election for a private organization to decide who they are going to back as candidates for various offices. There’s no legal basis for forcing them to choose candidates who actually qualify for those offices.

Now the general election is an entirely different boat.

They literally just need to add a way to “repackage” a game from your library into an inventory item and then they could use the Marketplace they already have

Which ironically is actually legal in the US. The big lines are libel, slander, defamation, incitement to imminent lawless action, fraud, threats and child pornography.

Assuming the person is not actually a child abuser, the example they used would actually cross the line in the US but really only for a civil case, rather than criminal. It wouldn’t even count as incitement unless he was calling for the alleged child abuser to be lynched or something, even “someone ought to string up this child abuser” probably doesn’t count as incitement.