Sounds like an obvious spot in the market for a bullshit-free smart TV. You’d just have to get the UX right.
Sounds like an obvious spot in the market for a bullshit-free smart TV. You’d just have to get the UX right.
I was just assuming it was just Power Word: Shit and would effect anyone up to however many hit dice.
To be fair, the president elected two months ago is the oldest asshole to have ever won the office.
At least in countries that charge patients money for their healthcare, these religious hospitals are free, right?
A few, but not remotely all. It’s really up to the individual hospital.
Then you’ve got the weird case of St. Jude’s which is somehow not a Catholic hospital despite literally being built as a shrine to St. Jude Thaddeus (patron saint of hopeless causes) by a Catholic man to fulfill a promise he made to build a shrine to St. Jude. St. Jude’s also does not charge patients for treatment, travel, housing, or food though they will bill insurance where possible.
Let’s be fair, if I told you that a UFO cult led by a sci-fi writer performed a massive infiltration of the US government (the largest ever detected) in order to whitewash itself in official records you’d have thought I was wacko before Operation: Snow White came to light. The same UFO cult also had a number of their agents insert themselves into the life of a journalist who had written negative things about them in an attempt to get her to either off herself or be institutionalized, dubbed Operation: Freakout which was only uncovered in the aftermath of the discovery of Operation: Snow White.
The UFO cult in question is Scientology.
Yeah pornhub seems pretty legitimate and safe these days.
Yeah, they got threatened a few years ago with essentially banking cutting them off if they didn’t make a concerted effort to purge anything shady, which they achieved by purging basically all end-user uploads that weren’t verified models or studios.
Too bad there aren’t other porn sites with massive libraries of content that apparently no one in power has noticed.
The states aren’t banning PornHub from being accessed there, PornHub are blocking themselves from being accessed from those states so as to not need to comply with new state laws requiring ID proof of age to access because they don’t want to handle personally identifying information of end users. So basically you’re just waiting for law enforcement to notice and charge them, and then find out if they’re run out of somewhere the state can reasonably do anything about it.
Wikipedia is one of the last, best sources of information on the Internet that isn’t biased, corporate-sponsored bullsh*t.
Instead it’s bullshit built upon elaborate bureaucracy which has it’s own layers of issues depending on exactly what topic/field we’re talking about.
The biggest and most obvious flaw being that it’s more or less explicitly designed to fail spectacularly as regards any topic that the media doesn’t want to talk about (for example, anything that might make the media look bad) because there’s going to be an intentional lack of “reliable sources” on those topics.
The definition of a “reliable source” is another - there’s a fair bit of jockeying on that which functionally biases WP. Especially when you start looking at what disqualified a given source from being “reliable” and start to notice that the bar seems to be set very unevenly depending on the particular source and how well liked it is by certain power-editors.
It’s good enough for anything that’s not politically contentious to anyone, but I would never use it for anything other than a vague overview and starting point for other sources to dig into.
Every couple of years Chinese make a new Sun Wukong move, TV show, or videogame.
Let’s not forget that in the same way you can trace a huge amount of things you see in Western stories to the Greek epics and Gilgamesh you can trace a huge amount of things you see in anime/manga to the Journey to the West.
You’re actually demonstrating my point - I said “a common noun” for one and “a term” for the other. The whole point is that any “acceptable” language for those notions (a person of the sort who possesses female genitals and potentially has ova that she could hypothetically carry to term and identifies as a woman and a person attracted to the sort of person they might hypothetically be able to reproduce with) has to have at the very minimum an adjective if not an entire phrase attached to it.
For example, imagine someone tried to re-popularize the old English words to refer to cis folks, using wifmen for cis women in this example. That would immediately be deemed transphobic, specifically because it’s a common noun to refer specifically to cis women and not a shared category you have to use an adjective or phrase to differentiate from.
Same thing applies to orientation - we have a lot of words for sexual orientations. But a word for a person who is attracted to cis people of a given sex relative to one’s own is unacceptable - the very idea that there could be a term for it is transphobic. Despite sexual attraction being one of those rare cases where what genitals you have and whether or not they’re the original equipment is actually relevant.
Also wouldn’t “gynephile” meaning one who has an attraction to women still not be precise enough, since women includes trans women by definition, at least the feminine ones?
Let’s say yes, since we’re in a hypothetical. Breeding fetish, perhaps? Maybe just someone who’s specifically looking for a long term relationship leading into children?
Except “woman” doesn’t mean “female person” anymore, it means “anyone who identifies as a woman” because attaching any common noun at all for people based on sex rather than gender would be accused of transphobia.
It’s kind of like if someone asked what the term for the sexual orientation of someone who is interested in partners they could hypothetically reproduce with is, the answer is there isn’t one and suggesting there should be will get called transphobic.
Depending on whether you mean Sandy Hook/Columbine type shootings or any shooting that involves any school property in any fashion then either mostly white or mostly black. If you’re averaging a school shooting a day, then you’re including any shooting involving school property so mostly black but also fewer students than you’d expect (a lot of “school shootings” are just gang violence that involves school property in some fashion and a surprising number are accidental discharge of a concealed carry that hits no one).
I mean the point of all rating systems in the US was fear of government regulation of content and having to fight that particular legal battle. It basically exists because moral busybodies were upset about Night Trap, Mortal Kombat and Doom.
That’s fair.
when will euthanasia be legal?
It may not be legal, but when self-administered it’s not like you can be punished for it.
On a somewhat less severe side of things, lack of libido in women is still considered a jokey non-issue by most doctors but viagra has been on the market for decades for men.
Viagra doesn’t treat a lack of libido, it treats a lack of blood flow to the relevant anatomy. And it was discovered by accident - a drug meant to treat high blood pressure and angina that was more effective at doing something else to blood flow. In other words it’s not that men use viagra to have the desire, but rather to get the equipment to play along. Lack of libido in men is often a symptom of low testosterone, so they check for that and prescribe testosterone if that’s the issue but that’s really the entire toolbox on that front.
Lack of libido in women is a much harder problem to solve, and the first attempt at it that ever made it to market barely worked, had to be taken daily, and went horribly wrong if you consume any alcohol at all. There’s a second that hit market a few years later that’s supposedly more effective and isn’t a daily regimen but is also an injection, has significant potential side effects and can’t be mixed with naltrexone (a drug used to treat opioid addiction) because it will cause naltrexone not to work.
Compare to contraception, where there are tons of options available to women and basically all insurance is legally required to cover at least one brand of each type, including barrier methods, with a prescription. The options available to men are condoms or being surgically sterilized, and there’s no requirement to cover either at all.
It’s harder to get contraceptives for men approved because it doesn’t prevent a medical condition for the user and so the bar for what is acceptable as a side effect is really low. You may have seen news stories about a male pill and men chickening out over the side effects (what wimps!) but the problem wasn’t men backing out of the study, but that the acceptable side effects for a treatment that prevents a different person from developing a condition are so restrictive that they killed the study because it was already never going to be approved.
There is another male contraceptive that’s been in development in India since the 80s, and as of 2022 has still not been approved - RISUG. Phase 3 clinical trials for RISUG were published more than twenty years ago. There’s a variation of RISUG that’s in development in the US called Vasalgel, and it’s been in development here for over a decade. RISUG and Vasalgel are long term reversible contraceptives - think like an IUD - that consist of an injection in each of the vas deferens and lasts up to a decade, but can be removed earlier if needed by another set of injections in the vas deferens. Should it get approved in the US, there’s no legal requirement that any insurance cover it, let alone without copay because the ACA specifically only requires coverage for contraceptive options for women.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure they realized they were never going to convict her of anything. Protected speech that also references a wildly popular killing is just not something you’re going to be able to convict over.
All of this is framed from a US perspective, I apologize to the extent that it’s relevant.
getting paid less for the same work
Essentially not a real thing, and if it is happening at a particular employer it’s illegal and time to sue. The wage gap that’s published is measured as the difference in median total earnings for full time year round workers by sex, and any attempt to constrain it further to be “for the same work” (like adjusting for industry, role, hours worked, experience, etc) rapidly causes it to diminish. It is at it’s heart an artifact of differences in the average life path of men and women - to the point that young, childless, urban, educated women actually earn more than similar men.
and not at all for all the work that isn’t considered work by men like raising kids and running a home
Taking care of one’s home/family isn’t paid work for anyone, regardless of sex. Men aren’t paid for more stereotypically male housework either, like lawn maintenance, cleaning gutters, dealing with pests, plumbing or electrical, that sort of thing. If you do domestic work for another household, generally you do get paid for it.
Also, there’s no third party mandating anything about how your household divides the tasks necessary to keep things going - you negotiate your own division of household labor with any partner(s) or roommate(s). For example in my household my wife and I both work full time, and for most “departments” of stuff that need done we each take a role. She does the laundry, I fold and put away (because her clothes have more complicated cleaning directions, and it’s harder for her to lift and haul stuff around). Whoever cooked doesn’t do dishes. I bring in groceries, she puts them up (the steps and heavy lifting are easier for me). Etc, etc.
again, statistically it’s pretty much all women
Dig deeper into those stats. Specifically, look at the differences in numbers that measure recent victimization versus longer periods. What you tend to see is the more “fresh” the experience is (looking at recent months or years rather than lifetime) the more likely men are to report it (almost as though men are repeatedly told by society that they can’t be victims of sexual assault and doubly can’t be the victim of a woman until they internalize it so they mentally file those experiences away as something else [if you can’t be a victim then what happened can’t be a violation]- I’m speaking from experience on that one) and previous 12 month numbers fare closer to like a 60/40 split presuming you don’t also do some trickery of categorization where (for example) ways a woman are likely to sexually assault a man get filed into a subcategory of “other” to make the comparison less obvious, with women being a majority of perpetrators against men (ignoring the incarcerated of course because then men are a large majority of both perpetrators and victims - there’s a reason term “rape culture” was originally coined to describe prison).
No. He was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil trial. Convictions are criminal and the standard of evidence is higher.
Basically the courts have decided that it’s slightly more likely than not that he sexually abused Carroll, which is all that’s needed to win a civil case. Criminal cases are on a “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold which is much harder to meet.
Frankly, he probably wouldn’t be criminally convicted because of the higher standard - the defense in a criminal trial doesn’t have to prove the accused didn’t do it, they don’t even have to prove it’s more likely than not they didn’t do it, they only need to prove there’s a reasonable doubt that they might not have done it. And I think there’s just enough wiggle room around it he could possibly skate by.