Yeah, that convinces me every time that it's perfectly safe to share intimate spaces (with large gaps usually under the doors) with strange men who might also be carrying recording devices.
I canceled my recurring ACLU donation ages ago and they still badger me for money. I usually send your javelin thrower graphic in the return envelope. Thanks for helping me change it up.
Conflicting view here, about the 1940s retro art, because it sends a mixed message.
Old-timey art like this is usually combined with old-fashioned propaganda statements to convince the reader the statements are OUTDATED—and that we know better now. (Example: “Marijuana usage leads to addiction, promiscuity, and death!” combined with lurid pulp-novel art.)
By contrast, we want to persuade readers that TRA arguments are false, not because the statements are archaic, but because they are simply at odds with science, biology, and reported experience.
It’s confusing to me. I had to carefully sift the art to figure out the artist/author's intent. And I'm well-versed on the issues—been following this here in the US, enraged, for years.
Had to research the Chase Strangio reference but then I found this humorous little ditty on Wikipedia ...Chase Strangio (born circa 1982/1983)... Who knows where he came from, nor when he came, who knows where he has been, but Glen Greenwald, who In November 2020, criticized Strangio... crikey I didnt think I would ever read that a former Guardian Journalist would criticise anything woke. Don't get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for Greenwald, in his handling of the Edward Snowden and Wikileaks cases, and I was a big fan of The Intercept just after that time, but Glen Greenwald criticising Chase Strangio, let's see, what did he say? Well now I really am confused because it appears a book called "Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters" is at the centre of that dispute but it appears to be a woke v's woke argument. I tried to understand the finer details but then my brain went into some kind of meltdown and I was unable to get into the subtleties of that argument due to the fact that I was unable to give a flying f*** about their internal wrangling. Perhaps someone with more patience, and better dissemination abitities could enlighten me and simplify. I thought Greenwald was a hero but it turns out he might be a woke activist. I must start reading The Intercept again to see if Greenwald has crashed into the swamp and likes it there! Help me I need some kind of therapy after trying to understand that little argument. Anyway the Chase Strangio page is interesting for another fact. It doesnt actually meet many of Wikipedia's own rules as to what constitutes an article worthy to remain on their pages
Superb! It should be on every notice board across the land.
The home toilet argument. 😄😄😄😄
Yeah, that convinces me every time that it's perfectly safe to share intimate spaces (with large gaps usually under the doors) with strange men who might also be carrying recording devices.
I canceled my recurring ACLU donation ages ago and they still badger me for money. I usually send your javelin thrower graphic in the return envelope. Thanks for helping me change it up.
a thousand 'Well done!' smilies!
Brilliant
Like the retro vib.
My toilet is for my household and invited guests ...
There's no "public toilet" sign on the front door.
Conflicting view here, about the 1940s retro art, because it sends a mixed message.
Old-timey art like this is usually combined with old-fashioned propaganda statements to convince the reader the statements are OUTDATED—and that we know better now. (Example: “Marijuana usage leads to addiction, promiscuity, and death!” combined with lurid pulp-novel art.)
By contrast, we want to persuade readers that TRA arguments are false, not because the statements are archaic, but because they are simply at odds with science, biology, and reported experience.
It’s confusing to me. I had to carefully sift the art to figure out the artist/author's intent. And I'm well-versed on the issues—been following this here in the US, enraged, for years.
Had to research the Chase Strangio reference but then I found this humorous little ditty on Wikipedia ...Chase Strangio (born circa 1982/1983)... Who knows where he came from, nor when he came, who knows where he has been, but Glen Greenwald, who In November 2020, criticized Strangio... crikey I didnt think I would ever read that a former Guardian Journalist would criticise anything woke. Don't get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for Greenwald, in his handling of the Edward Snowden and Wikileaks cases, and I was a big fan of The Intercept just after that time, but Glen Greenwald criticising Chase Strangio, let's see, what did he say? Well now I really am confused because it appears a book called "Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters" is at the centre of that dispute but it appears to be a woke v's woke argument. I tried to understand the finer details but then my brain went into some kind of meltdown and I was unable to get into the subtleties of that argument due to the fact that I was unable to give a flying f*** about their internal wrangling. Perhaps someone with more patience, and better dissemination abitities could enlighten me and simplify. I thought Greenwald was a hero but it turns out he might be a woke activist. I must start reading The Intercept again to see if Greenwald has crashed into the swamp and likes it there! Help me I need some kind of therapy after trying to understand that little argument. Anyway the Chase Strangio page is interesting for another fact. It doesnt actually meet many of Wikipedia's own rules as to what constitutes an article worthy to remain on their pages