Maine's Legislature Passes Bill To Partially Decriminalize Prostitution
Plus: Court rules that naked female spa can't exclude transgender women, Biden vetoes bill blocking student loan forgiveness, and more...

Maine lawmakers are on track to partially decriminalize prostitution. A bill sponsored by state Rep. Lois Galgay Reckitt (D–South Portland) would remove criminal penalties for selling sex in some circumstances. The measure passed the state Senate on Wednesday after passing the House on May 30. But sex worker rights advocates say the bill doesn't go far enough.
The bill would not simply decriminalize consensual prostitution altogether. Rather, it would rechristen prostitution as commercial sexual exploitation, defined as "providing, agreeing to provide or offering to provide a pecuniary benefit to another
person to engage in a sexual act or sexual contact." That means anyone who pays or attempts to pay a sex worker would still be committing an illegal act.
Essentially, the Maine measure would institute what's known as "asymmetrical criminalization" or the "Nordic Model" of prostitution laws, a scheme criminalizing people who pay for sex but not totally criminalizing those who sell it. This model has become popular in parts of Europe and among certain strains of U.S. feminists.
But keeping sex work customers criminalized keeps in place many of the harms of total criminalization. The sex industry must still operate underground, which makes it more difficult for sex workers to work safely and independently. Sex workers are still barred from advertising their services. Customers are still reluctant to be screened. And cops still spend time ferreting out and punishing people for consensual sex instead of focusing on sex crimes where someone is actually being victimized.
A recent study of prostitution laws in European countries found full decriminalization or legalization of prostitution linked to lower rape rates, while countries that instituted the Nordic model during the study period saw their rates of sexual violence go up. "Among the prostitution prohibition models, the Nordic model has a stronger effect on increasing rape than criminalization does," wrote the researchers in a paper published in The Journal of Law and Economics.
Most sex worker rights advocates want full decriminalization of prostitution between consenting adults.
The Maine measure wouldn't even fully decriminalize engaging in sex work.
The measure keeps in place the crime of promoting prostitution (only renamed as "promoting commercial sexual exploitation"), which includes "publicly soliciting patrons for commercial sexual exploitation." This is defined as making "an offer, made in a public place, to engage in a sexual act or sexual contact…in return for a pecuniary benefit." This criminalizes things like soliciting on the streets, obviously, as well as things like quietly offering paid sex to someone in a private conversation at a bar or club. And since sex work advertising would still be illegal, too, basically any way of actually finding customers could get sex workers in trouble—and encourage reliance on pimps.
Promoting commercial sexual exploitation would also include "causing or aiding another to commit or engage in sexual conduct or sexual acts in exchange for a pecuniary benefit, other than as a patron." Laws like these are often used to go after sex workers working with one another (for instance, a woman who posts an ad for paid sex with her and a consenting friend or a sex worker who drops off another sex worker to see a client).
"Leasing or otherwise permitting a place controlled by the defendant" to be used for prostitution would also count as promoting commercial sexual exploitation—making sex workers who wanted to work together in the same location for safety purposes guilty.
Removing criminal penalties for prostitution in some circumstances is a good step. But this law would still exacerbate harm against sex workers and lead to their persecution by law enforcement.
And even in this mild form, the bill is not guaranteed to become law. "It still faces votes in both chambers, and Democratic Gov. Janet Mills vetoed a similar bill in 2021," noted the Bangor Daily News. Mills is a former prosecutor and state attorney general and "could be the major obstacle to the bill this time as well."
For more on state attempts at prostitution law reform this year, see: "States Try To Reform Prostitution Laws—for Better and Worse."
FREE MINDS
Female spa can't exclude transgender women, court says. A Korean spa for women, where patrons are "typically fully naked" in many areas and required to be naked for certain services, is legally barred from excluding transgender women with male genitalia, a court has ruled.
The case—Olympus Spa v. Armstrong—comes about after the Washington State Human Rights Commission said Olympus Spa's policy of admitting only "biological women" (as its website states) went against the state's ban on gender identity discrimination in public accommodations. The spa challenged the commission's assessment, arguing that it violated free speech, free exercise of religion, and intimate association rights. "Women are in a vulnerable position when they are unclothed and/or having treatment while unclothed and we seek to ensure that they feel their privacy and rights are respected," the spa argued, situating this argument in the owners' religious beliefs.
In an opinion earlier this week, Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein sided with the human rights commission. From Rothstein's decision:
As for their [Free Exercise Clause] claim, Plaintiffs observe that they "have the liberty to not only believe as they do about males and females in a state of undress, but they also have the right to freely exercise their religious rights, i.e., to act in accordance with their faith-based convictions." Plaintiffs allege that the Commission's enforcement of the [Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD)] against them, "which requires them to service nude males and females in the same rooms," forces them "to choose between violating the law or their religious convictions." This, according to Plaintiffs, imposes a substantial burden on the exercise of their religious beliefs. The Commission counters that the WLAD is a neutral law of general applicability and therefore does not run afoul of the First Amendment. The Court agrees with the Commission and dismisses this claim….
The law does not discriminate on its face, and it does not by its terms favor a particular religion or the non-exercise of religion. Nor have Plaintiffs alleged facts to suggest that the legislature was motivated by a masked intent to discourage religious exercise or discriminate against their religion….
Plaintiffs emphasize Olympus Spa's female-only exclusivity and female-oriented purpose. They likewise suggest that the business is sufficiently personal and private to warrant constitutional protection because "the state of being unclothed requires the most intimate of settings[.]"But this again elides a basic, controlling fact: Olympus Spa is a business that provides services to the public. And as was the case in Jaycees, Olympus Spa does not—"[a]part from … sex"—employ any criteria for judging patrons, who are routinely "admitted with no inquiry into their backgrounds."…
The Court does not minimize the privacy concerns at play when employees are performing exfoliating massages on nude patrons. Aside from this nudity, though, there is simply nothing private about the relationship between Olympus Spa, its employees, and the random strangers who walk in the door seeking a massage. Nor is there anything selective about the association at issue beyond Olympus Spa's "biological women" policy. The Court therefore has little difficulty concluding that the personal attachments implicated here are too attenuated to qualify for constitutional protection. Plaintiffs' intimate association claim is dismissed.
FREE MARKETS
Biden vetoes bill blocking student loan forgiveness. President Joe Biden has vetoed a bill that would block his executive order waiving a lot of student loan debt. The bill passed the Senate, largely along party lines, last week after passing the House in May.
Congressional Republicans led an effort to pass a bill blocking my Administration's plan to provide up to $20,000 in student debt relief to working and middle class Americans.
I won't back down on helping hardworking folks.
That's why I'm vetoing this bill. pic.twitter.com/ZeYEm4LOjz
— President Biden (@POTUS) June 7, 2023
Biden's veto illustrates how the courts can become the only recourse against executive overreach. Even if Congress tries to rein in executive power or prohibit a specific use of it, the president can simply veto this attempt to limit his (alleged) authority.
But Biden's big stretch on student loans—he claimed the pandemic gave him the right to forgive a huge amount of student loan debt—is facing obstacles in court. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit temporarily paused the plan last October. Two cases concerning it are now before the U.S. Supreme Court, which has already heard oral arguments in these cases and is expected to rule on them later this month.
QUICK HITS
What's happening in the House? For a second straight day, ultraconservative Republicans have ground the floor to a halt—out of anger at the McCarthy-Biden debt limit deal. The impact of this? The GOP cannot pass a couple of pro-gas-stove messaging bills backed by the hard right.
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) June 7, 2023
• The U.S. government is expected to borrow $1 trillion by the end of September.
• A federal court is allowing Washington state's ban on AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles to be enforced as lawsuits against the ban play out.
• Why everyone is talking about aliens.
• Canadian wildfires have been wreaking havoc on air quality in the U.S. Midwest and East Coast, with the issues now spreading south:
Times Square today pic.twitter.com/2ByEAmbLRo
— Christine Vanden Byllaardt (@cvbyllaardt) June 7, 2023
• Reason Editor at Large Nick Gillespie talks to Fox News contributor Kat Timpf about her new book, You Can't Joke About That: Why Everything Is Funny, Nothing Is Sacred, and We're All In This Together.
• Louisiana is the latest state to pass a ban on gender transition treatment for minors. "If the measure becomes law, Louisiana would join 17 states that have enacted bans or severe restrictions this year on access to transition care for minors," notes The New York Times.
• CNN chair Chris Licht has been fired.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
CNN chair Chris Licht has been fired.
Trump is running again, after all.
I basically make about $14,000 to $18,000 a month online. It’s enough tocomfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only workabout 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I triedit copy below web….
.
.
GO HERE —————->> https://Creatdoller.blogspot.Com
Maine lawmakers are on track to partially decriminalize prostitution.
You can have the first half of a half-and-half.
Maine's Legislature Passes Bill To Partially Decriminalize Prostitution
Is a roll in the hay with a Maine hooker called a Lobster Roll? ;). 🙂
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Yes, just don't get the clam chowder.
That's Chow-dah if you're Yankee. 😉
Did somebody mention women and lobsters?
Oh yeah.
That woman has crabs ass well ass that lobster!
Is that the next stage in mixed gender relationships?
Ooooh. In Maine they use cold mayo. Hot butter is better.
As I read this, the only cases this would change in Maine are those wherein someone accepts compensation for unsolicited sex! Who was ever prosecuted for that?
Female spa can't exclude transgender women, court says.
The War on Men is finally over.
That's a war on women, buddy.
Women with penises, facial hair and an Adam's apple. So stunning and brave.
Ignore the ruling. Simple.
why not Biden does all the time
This is what the women's rights movement is all about - forcing women to get naked in front of men and view and touch their genitals.
Progress!
Sex work is work.
Women lost the "Sexual Revolution" and don't even know it. This is just another long-range consequence.
Seems more like a war on Asians who run spas for women.
President Joe Biden has vetoed a bill that would block his executive order waiving a lot of student loan debt.
Even if he didn't have an election coming up, this was a no brainer.
No brainer is what Joe does best.
Isn't "no brainer" his Secret Service handle?
I thought it was "Mr. Potato Head" but that works too.
Ask the Easter Bunny.
For a second straight day, ultraconservative Republicans have ground the floor to a halt—out of anger at the McCarthy-Biden debt limit deal. The impact of this? The GOP cannot pass a couple of pro-gas-stove messaging bills backed by the hard right.
Keep sending this useless message and you won't be able to send your useless message!
On the upside, this saves the Senate from having to consider the Republican House's messaging bills and President Biden having to veto them.
...because, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, they aren't coming for gas stoves, right?
We need a new word for conspiracies that are true before the media blitz tries to deny them.
The truth? Has worked forever.
How about instead we come up with a word for media that tries to destroy or obfuscate truth before it gets out?
"Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda"?
Narrative Generator?
CNN
...pro-gas-stove messaging bills backed by the hard right.
Who says ENB isn't a leftist?
She thinks gas stoves are used only to make sandwiches.
Cuban sandwiches? Asking for a fellow commenter.
Still not sure which sex act that is, but it has to be one.
MMF threesome with two Cuban dudes.
not just Hard right but Ultra conservative. since when is freedom of choice an ultra conservative hard right policy, didn't liberals and libertarians used to be against such regulations
Oh man, the number of times Reason writers get accused of bias for merely quoting someone. It wasn’t ENB’s words.
What’s the actual number?
Yeah, because they don't choose who to quote; the quotes just leap onto the page out of nowhere.
How is supporting gas stoves a "Hard Right" position? Natural gas produces the least Carbon of any petroleum-derived fuel. All but Eco-Wackos should love it!
Natural gas produces the least Carbon of any petroleum-derived fuel.
But eLeCtRiC sToVeS r CaRbOn NeUtRaL!!!111!!!!!! DERP!!!!!
I think electric stoves are more efficient than gas. Especially induction. But so what? If food prep was just about using the least energy, we could all eat cold food straight from cans. Gas is better because it's better for cooking, if you actually know how to cook.
Further, it's no body's business but mine.
Yes, especially that.
Gee, you must be fun in a performative society.
we could all eat cold food straight from cans
Don't give them ideas.
Are there canned bugs out there? 😉
I think electric stoves are more efficient than gas.
I had to look it up because I thought gas was more efficient, and it is. A lot of energy is lost between burning gas to make electricity, getting the electricity to the stove, and then turning it into heat. So much that gas stoves are three times more efficient than regular electric stoves.
Especially induction.
What surprised me is that induction is three times more efficient than gas, which makes it nine times more efficient than regular electric.
Learn something new every day.
I have a glass top stove. When I go to my sister’s house that has a high end gas stove, I’ll sometimes heat up a kettle or try to cook on it. Efficiency becomes a tricky subject. Sure, the gas might use less energy, but at least I can get a kettle to boil before I retire on my glass-top. My time is worth something.
My folks have a gas stove, and only one of the burners really puts out heat. You use that one to start something, then move it to another burner to cook while you start the next thing. Pain in the ass.
The stoves I used in restaurants put out an order of magnitude more BTUs than residential stoves, and they also have serious ventilation.
The problem you see isn't gas. It's that most residential gas stoves aren't very powerful. Maybe they all are by some regulatory fiat.
I'm interested in this so I'll do some research at some point.
The problem you see isn’t gas. It’s that most residential gas stoves aren’t very powerful. Maybe they all are by some regulatory fiat
I'm sure it's set up that way so someone doesn't accidentally blow up the neighborhood.
That's why I mentioned ventilation.
Commercial gas ranges 30,000 - 35,000 BTUs.
Residential gas ranges 500 - 15,000 BTUs.
I've always preferred electric over gas stoves for that very reason. We have a gas stove, and I absolutely despise it. Next kitchen renovation, I'm planning to have that line closed off and use an electric instead.
Also, I had a glass-top stove and absolutely hated it. It may have gotten hot fast, but it also stayed hot for a long time. Very unpleasant surprise when cleaning the thing, which never got totally clean over the burners. Even with a razor blade. Hated that thing.
Glass-tops are a pain in the ass. Normal electric burner stoves remain the best I've ever used.
But it's nice to have something to cook with (and just make heat) when the electric power goes down. Even with my modest generator hooked up to the house, my gas stove top is the only way I can cook.
Hey Minadin, you design commercial kitchens, how many electric stoves / ranges / ovens have you ever specified?
Zero.
Once we had a project manager for a client give us the wrong cut sheet on a fryer, which called for electric instead of gas, and he got his ass absolutely chewed by the chef. It was an expensive fix, electric fryers require a ton of electric service that was now not necessary.
Huh. In my experience gas will boil a kettle of water way faster than electric. And glass tops are the worst. Maybe the newer stuff is better. And gas stoves often have different sized burners.
If boiling water fast is your priority, then induction is definitely the way to go though.
OK, well good. Because gas is better in every other way too. Conventional gas and electric both waste a lot of heat that goes into the air in the kitchen rather than the cooking vessel, which is why induction is so much more efficient.
Compared to what I use for heat, my gas stove uses approximately nothing, so I don't spend much time thinking about it. And it works when the power goes out.
it works when the power goes out
That's a serious bug for the State. They want to able to shut off all your power remotely when you disobey.
I'm on propane too, so they can't just shut off my gas supply.
That's why they need to be able to shut off your bank account, too.
In a disaster/Shit-Hits-The-Fan (SHTF) scenario, make sure to cook as discretely, quickly, and quietly as possible, and especially without smoke, so that would-be two-legged predators aren’t made aware of and attracted to your cooking.
Also, in stores, be wary of random strangers who comment on your haul and say: “I know where I’m goin’ for supper!” They may be just jesting around and starting friendly conversation, but make sure they don’t actually follow you home.
Real conservatives cook on an open fire, using wood or, where available dried dung.
I love putting the kettle on the gas stove and bolling water for tea. [kevrob sips cuppa Barry’s Gold]
I like oak and mesquite cooked meat and kabobs, but I'll pass on the Ezekiel 4 bread.
It might be AT THE STOVE. But I'll reserve judgement on efficiency when you factor in the fact that the bulk of our energy production is gas fired, all the generation and transmission losses, and then calculate how many electric stoves are actually induction as opposed to old fashioned slow to heat, slow to cool junk.
Banning gas stoves is just the next banning plastic shopping bags (for ocean plastic pollution that comes from Asia, not here) or banning plastic straws (based on a 10 year old's made up statistic), or not having drinking water at a restaurant table because of a drought. The latest progressive fad to make individuals do something to sacrifice to their cause, even if it doesn't actually do jack shit.
You shut yer damned 'ultraconservative Republican' mouth, ACA, logic based on facts isn't welcome in response to ENB's totally libertarian and completely not progressive shitty takes on every fucking issue.
'Cept for the metal that goes into both making them and powering them, of course.
only ULTRA-MAGA chads would even consider using a gas stove.
It’s been three days and Lauren Boebert hasn’t denied reports that she fucked up and missed the big budget cap vote:
https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/video-disputes-lauren-boeberts-silent-protest-debt-ceiling-claim/
“CNN shared video Sunday showing Boebert running up U.S. Capitol steps and being told she missed the vote.”
Oops.
It certainly looks like this is true, but I have to wonder what the fuck the big deal is. Did the bill pass by a single vote? Would her tally have changed anything at all?
That’s not the point. It isn’t about the vote outcome; it’s about her competency and character.
She was very, very vocal about her opposition to the bill in the days leading up to the vote. Instead of fessing up that she screwed up, she said that she skipped the vote intentionally as a protest.
So, she has revealed herself as incompetent at performing a basic function of her job, and as being someone who lies to cover her ass.
Now if I were a voter in her district
I might well cynically brush her lying off as typical politician behavior, BUT missing important votes is really bad.
Since when to congress critters get judged on competency and character?
When they can use it to make Republicans look bad. If it's a Democrat, we'll I will just say Feinstein, Fetterman, Clayborn, AOC etc.
She looked good running up the steps.
her vote that wouldnt have mattered?
Are you pouncing?
The U.S. government is expected to borrow $1 trillion by the end of September.
"Our taxpayers are good for it."
A federal court is allowing Washington state's ban on AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles to be enforced as lawsuits against the ban play out.
Finally, cops get to enforce something in Washington state!
I'm sure enforcement will be limited to whites.
Why everyone is talking about aliens.
Because they're running out of distractions?
Wait, are they aliens or illegal aliens?
Is “they” here the Democrats? Don’t know if that’s what you meant but similar tweets to yours all point at the Democrats.
Thing that doesn’t make sense there is Tucker Carlson chose UFOs as one of the topics for his first Twitter show. He’s definitely not a Democratic mouthpiece.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart ......
SITE. ——>>> cashdollar12.com</a
I think "they" refers to "everyone" in the quoted text. In case you haven't noticed, Fist often makes jokes.
I DEMAND TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
If it only saves one more life.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/06/07/can-we-finally-tell-the-truth-about-lockdown/
Ever since March 2020, when then UK prime minister Boris Johnson ordered the nation to ‘stay at home’, only one view on lockdown has really been permissible. The conventional, ‘expert’ take had it that the stricter the restrictions, the more lives would be saved. More freedom means more death, we were told. Any concerns about the cost of lockdown – whether to our liberties, health, education or the economy – were apparently not worth contemplating. Worse still, some of those who voiced scepticism of the lockdown policy were monitored by the state and censored on social media. Lockdown, after all, was said to be backed by ‘The Science’.
There have always been good reasons to question this consensus. A new study published this week by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) adds yet more weight to the case against lockdown. Researchers from John Hopkins University in the US and Lund University in Sweden examined over 20,000 studies on the efficacy of various Covid restrictions. They calculated that the number of lives saved by the UK’s first national lockdown was just 1,700 – far fewer than the number of lives that would be lost to a typical flu season. This leads them to conclude that the benefits of lockdown were ‘a drop in a bucket compared to the staggering collateral costs’. As one of the researchers put it: ‘Most likely, lockdowns represent the biggest policy mistake of modern times.’
The economic fallout of lockdown is still with us today, too. The first national lockdown resulted in the largest fall in economic output since the Great Frost of 1709, when a cold winter destroyed all our crops and made the Thames freeze over. Although the pain of lockdown was largely soothed at the time by vast state spending, ultra-low interest rates and half-a-trillion pounds worth of quantitative easing, these measures have all ultimately fed into the current inflation crisis.
The greatest casualty of all, of course, was liberty. The liberal assumption that you can do as you please, unless the law says otherwise, was turned on its head. For months on end, we were banned from leaving the house without a state-sanctioned excuse. Police took it upon themselves to monitor the skies with drones, rifle through people’s shopping baskets and break into their homes, often without any legal justification. Lockdown represented, in the words of one Court of Appeal judge, ‘possibly the most restrictive regime on the public life of persons and businesses ever’.
The real scandal of lockdown is not just its ineffectiveness. It is not just the obvious and measurable harms it has caused to health, wealth and education. No, it is the fact that our freedoms were so quickly and comprehensively confiscated from us, and that our most precious liberties could be so easily overridden. We must never repeat this inhuman experiment.
Oh, but we will.
I can't wait for the climate lockdowns.
Probably coming sooner than later. All the hand wringing about the shitty air quality - caused by Canadian wildfires caused by climate change (not shitty forest management on the part of an incompetent fucktard government) is just the initial fear mongering stage. I figure by the end of the month they'll be at leas floating the idea of "shelter in place" orders (shelter in place because it sounds scarier).
Just in time for the 4th of July holiday. Our founding fathers would be so fucking proud...
Just in time for the 4th of July holiday
I predicted here a couple of weeks ago that there will be widespread cancellations of Independence Day celebrations this summer.
Yep. :'(
As one of the researchers put it: ‘Most likely, lockdowns represent the biggest policy mistake of modern times.’
Uh, excuse me Doctor Gorsuch, but I believe you've forgotten about WWII.
I'll see your WWII and raise you a New Deal.
I'm going to raise you with the Versailles Treaty and the Washington Naval Treaties.
I fold.
What about giving women the vote?
That's only a problem if you want to avoid an aggressively caring but emotionally unstable nanny state.
Regarding the spa, seems to me they are discriminating based on biological sex, not on gender identity.
What's the address of this place? I need to know for...reasons...*throws on rainbow Tshirt*
*throws on rainbow Tshirt*
...and no pants.
NO SHIRTCOCKING!
Wait for the Shackford column celebrating this ruling. He'll explain that transwomen are 100% unambiguously female in an anatomical, biological sense. No surgery necessary.
Nah, he just will not understand why any woman should have such an outdated attitude as to be squeamish about being naked around a stranger with a penis. It is not a problem for him, afterall.
It might be a problem for Shackford if it were flaccid.
OK, just ban penises.
Believe it or not, you may be on to something.
I wonder if that would actually work.
"OK, fine, fuck it. We're not women only. We just don't allow penises in. Whether or not they're attached to 'women'."
Ignoring the leftist change up of definitions again are we? Sex and gender identity are different until it isn't useful for the specific narrative, then they're the same.
Sex and gender identity are different until it isn’t useful for the specific narrative, then they’re the same.
Is that what they actually mean by "gender fluid?"
Just please don't get any of your gender fluid in my eyes.
My gender fluid hasn't gone that far in years.
Canadian wildfires have been wreaking havoc on air quality in the U.S. Midwest and East Coast, with the issues now spreading south...
They couldn't get us with their acid rain so now this???
If that smokey haze had been blanketing Iowa and Nebraska instead of NYC, would we be getting 24/7 news coverage of it?
No. That's all flyover country, and who on the coasts cares about that?
And it would be proper retribution for abortion laws.
Nebraska was hit by major flooding about five years ago and it didn’t show up at all on my news feed. I only heard about it because lots of my family were impacted.
"Wild"fires...
I've been breathing this smoke for 3 days now and I'm still not buzzed. I expected more of Canadian smoke.
If we let a Canadian team win a Cup, will they stop burning their country down?
Gas stoves are a hard right talking point?
Way to prove how biased you are, that gas stoves are a hard right talking point.
What do you call a person with libertine values who supports state action to constrain other values?
An asshole?
2/3 of reasonmag staff, 1/2ish of commentariat here -2/3ish at volokh. Dishonest fuckwit, hypocrite devoid of integrity? Activist? Religious zealot? Minadin already nailed the one-word definition. Not that any of this matters -for the most part, folks like this refuse to accept that they are capable of being wrong.
A lefty shit-pile?
Privileged?
If the measure becomes law, Louisiana would join 17 states that have enacted bans or severe restrictions this year on access to transition care for minors...
"Care."
"Gender-affirming care" means "sex-denying mutilation."
Well, liberals did promise us a government that cares.
No assurances there about what exactly they will care about or whether it's in the people's best interests but at least they care.
Shouldn't "gender-affirming care" mean getting breast implants for flat-chested women and the like?
And ED treatment?
“Care.”
They keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.
I'm not convinced it matters to them. It's a soothing sounding word, so effective for propaganda.
Inconceivable!!!
"I-I'll tell you in a minute. First, let's drink. Me from my glass, and you from yours."
Funny how the meaning of that word has changed. "Care" used to be something bad. People with hard lives looked "careworn", and happy people were "without a care".
You can just say "bitter old feminist studies professors and cat lady hags." We won't hold it against you.
Who are mostly jealous that other women have enough sex appeal to attract paying fans.
"among certain strains of U.S. feminists."
Omicron feminists? Arcturus feminists?
Articles of impeachment filed against Mayorkas.
https://www.thecentersquare.com/issues/border/article_53b170b0-0576-11ee-8003-2f94df071801.html
Committee on Homeland Security Chair Clay Higgins, R-LA., has introduced articles of impeachment against Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his failure to secure the southern border.
Higgins said that impeachment "should require clear evidence of intentional, repeated unconstitutional or illegal actions that bring measurable injury to our Republic."
“Secretary Mayorkas has long ago crossed that threshold," Higgins said at the hearing.
Higgins argued Mayorkas has deliberately allowed the border situation to "disintegrate" and ceded control of the region Mexican drug cartels.
"His arrogant disregard for the security and sanctity of the American people has been shocking to behold," Higgins said. "I think that in my 62 years, I’ve never met a more pompous, insidious man. I prepared the foundational posit of these articles long ago, yet I’ve been prayerful that impeachment might not be required. I’ve given him fair warning to resign his position. Now, he shall reap what he hath sown.”
Good. That guy is a pussy.
He could at least feign some anger.
Is he an underage pussy? Because that's the only reason you'd care.
A few years back you posted kiddy porn to this site, and your initial handle was banned. The link below details all the evidence surrounding that ban. A decent person would honor that ban and stay away from Reason. Instead you keep showing up, acting as if all people should just be ok with a kiddy-porn-posting asshole hanging around. Since I cannot get you to stay away, the only thing I can do is post this boilerplate.
https://reason.com/2022/08/06/biden-comforts-the-comfortable/?comments=true#comment-9635836
That drivel you posted this morning was the among the most ignorant ever seen here.
You should just say you're a dumbass as a way of confession.
That drivel you posted this morning was the among the most ignorant ever seen here.
Don't worry, it's a drop in the bucket compared to your daily offerings, you hicklib pederast.
The drivel you couldn't manage to quote properly or understand simple words like "some"? But had to respond to anyway?
Fuck yourself, you're the right mental age to enjoy both ends.
But still least you outed sarc for blindly defending his team again. Which apparently now includes multiple pedophiles.
A perfect example of turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lying; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, a TDS-addled asshole and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
"That drivel you posted this morning was the among the most ignorant ever seen here."
Strong words coming from a paid troll and Sqrlsy-tier shitposter.
Not having seen it, and not interested in ever seeing it or any, I'm going to guess that smug douchbags like spb2 are male and prefer cp that shows fucking little boys. And that's what they prefer offline as well. It's a principled stand reasonmag is taking here, allowing the shitstain to post; libertarians for pederasty. Libertarians for disseminators of cp. They could get that motto printed up and try to oust the nasty fascists who took over the LP...
Is Ultraconservative the same as MAGAconsertives?
I'm so confused! (Vinny Barbarino voice)
Not really. Ultraconservatives are a tribe with tribal rules and principles, while MAGAconservatives are a cult of personality without any principles whatsoever other than attacking anyone who dares to criticize their Dear Leader.
Uh huh.
Now do Democrats.
Not sure what you mean because I didn’t "do" Republicans. If you’re talking about cult of personality, Obama sure had one. Can’t say the same about Biden. At least not in support of the guy. Though the Trump cult reflexively hates him and everything he does, even when he continues and expands the very same policies they defended (by defended I mean attacked critics) under Trump.
He should do himself.
We’re going to see a “Super Saiyan Conservative” label at some point, I can feel it.
I'm claiming that one right now.
Yes, but that's all a small price to pay to lock up more men.
Although I can't wait for a story about some trannie with a lady dick getting arrested for soliciting a female prostitute. It'll be fun watching the mental gymnastics of progressives trying to simultaneously paint the trannie and prostitute as "victims."
WTF is a “messaging bill”?
I think it's when they try and introduce a bill they know will get shot down right away.
It's a left over phrase from the ancient times when you had to pay for each text message.
A bill from Western Union?
My, you are ancient! 😉
"Female spa can't exclude transgender women, court says. A Korean spa for women, where patrons are "typically fully naked" in many areas and required to be naked for certain services, is legally barred from excluding transgender women with male genitalia"
You WILL see the ladydick, and you WILL like it
It's not going to lick itself
Sounds like Jonathan Yaniv will have a place to immigrate to soon.
Freedom!
In case you wondered, shit like
"Female spa can't exclude transgender women, court says. A Korean spa for women, where patrons are "typically fully naked" in many areas and required to be naked for certain services, is legally barred from excluding transgender women with male genitalia, a court has ruled."
is why so many of the public are now sick and tired of the tranny BS.
If those bigoted naked women don’t want to look at a hairy set of cock and balls while getting a Brazilian wax, they can just stay home.
Preferably barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, amiright! #MakeMeASammich
/sarc
It really is. They are in such a bubble that they cannot recognize how much they are pissing off the public. I don't give a crap what they do with each other or to themselves, but when they mutilate kids, teach them to stuff dollar bills in drag queen shorts, and invade women's sports, restrooms, prisons, and other areas so they can wave their dicks around, I get mad enough that I would not be bothered by making all their private actions illegal again, if that is the only way to make their public depravity illegal again.
Lissen up you queers and trannies! You can have private legality only if it stays private. The vast majority of the company will throw your private perversions under the bus if you try to make them publicly permissible.
Sad thing is --- the Christian right was about 100% accurate with their warnings of what the embrace of gay culture will lead to. Few of their warnings have no come 100% true.
I remember when gay rights would have no negative impact on anybody else. Those were the days.
"the Christian right was about 100% accurate with their warnings"
Turns out they were actually a little circumspect in their predictions. I think that they thought pedophilia was the end game. I don't expect anyone anticipated the push for the physical maiming of children.
I think pedophilia IS the endgame for them
The clergy didn't want the competition?
>>push for the physical maiming of children.
G*d. Abraham. Isaac.
Just some skin on the tip, not the whole thing + testicles. You can still get someone pregnant even if you're no longer susceptible to phimosis.
Anyway, what does circumcision have to do with Christians?
"Take notice: I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I testify to every man who gets himself circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been severed from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.
But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. All that matters is faith, expressed through love." - Galatians 5:2-6
even more apter
The whole Peter v Paul. Peter wanted a church in the mold of the Jewish faith with adherence to the Mosaic Laws and an hierarchy. Paul favored a faith based individual approach. Also, Paul's letters tend to be summed up as 'stop the stupid bickering, none of you are right, just love each other and Christ, that is the key to salvation'. It's amazing how some have twisted Paul's teachings into some strict heterodoxy.
The "Peter v. Paul" debate is an allegory. The positions attributed to them were debated by different factions of early Christians, but it's unlikely the Paul ever met Peter, or even heard of him. For that matter, it's unlikely that Paul ever heard of Jesus.
If the letters attributed to Paul are any indications he heard of Jesus.
They're not. Most biblical scholars agree that most of the Pauline letters were written by Paul, but that they contain later revisions and interpolations.
If you take mentions of Jesus Christ out of the epistles of Paul there wouldn't be enough to even fill a single paragraph. Jesus is virtually all he ever wrote about.
I find it hard to believe you've read the epistles if your making such a claim.
Anyway, most scholars believe that Paul definitely wrote seven of the epistles. Galatians, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philemon, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians. There is no real dispute on these. Those who don't are cranks with an agenda.
First Timothy, Second Timothy, and Titus are suspected to be pseudepigraphic by a large number of scholars, and whether Paul wrote the last three epistles in his name (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians) is also widely debated.
According to some scholars, Paul probably wrote the debated letters with the help of a secretary, and the scribe would have influenced their style, but not their theological content.
Many scholars believe that Paul first collected his letters for publication himself. It was normal practice in the first century for letter writers to keep one copy for themselves and send a second copy to the recipients; surviving collections of ancient letters sometimes originated from the senders' copies, at other times from the recipients' copies.
Also, remember that at that time "Jesus" and "Christ" were not synonymous. The cults of the Christ predated Jesus. What we call Christianity developed when the Hellenistic Christic cults merged with the Jewish Jesus cult.
No.
Where on earth did you get this from. It's pretty obvious that Christianity was an apocalyptic messianic Jewish cult from the get go.
"Khristós" was just the Greek translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic "Ha-mashiach". Both words mean "The Anointed One" in their respective languages. Both Aramaic and Greek were lingua franca in the Eastern Mediterranean at the time, so the words would've been used interchangeably.
So, you were there?
Allowing gay people to have some rights and embrace of gay culture are two different things.
It has been one in the same, sorry. "We want tolerance" morphed into "You MUST approve of this" quickly.
Yes, the left treats gay rights and embrace of gay culture as the same thing, but that doesn't mean that libertarians or conservatives had to go along with their way of thinking. More of the conservative victimhood narrative, letting the left control the conversation and then nursing your outrage over it rather than simply and calmly opposing their point of view in a calm, adult manner.
Transgenderism has nothing to do with tolerance of homosexual orientation; in fact, it is a sexist backslide from sexual freedom.
I agree and if the gay community stopped covering for them, it'd be in their best interests. I do not get why the gay community allowed trans to glom onto their movement.
I don't see the gay community "covering for them", but on the other hand, few of them speak out. That does seem to be changing.
https://mareview.substack.com/p/gays-against-trans-activism
How dare you criticize activists in their search for personal fulfillment through hyperbolic political performance and mandated public adoration!
IT'S JUST ABOUT BAFFROOMS!
It's no longer enough for them to just be free to live their private lives as they see fit and others to tolerate their choices. Nope, now their ladydicks must be seen, celebrated as "stunning and brave" and any biological human female (aka woman) who doesn't want to see ladydick while nude in a spa (or locker room, restroom, or any other "women only" space) must me shunned as some kind of hateful bigot.
Fucking clown world.
It probably also explains why people are sick and tired of libertarians too. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's noticed the more "freedom" we have on paper, the less we have in fact.
Basically. Giving them "freedom" took away a lot of freedom of speech.
I would posit that it's because so many self ascribed libertarians only ever seen to crawl out of the woodwork for the most fringe of fringe. Like open borders. They admit a government has a right, even an obligation to keep certain people out, like people with communicable diseases, violent criminals, terrorist, foreign agents and military personnel etc. But then they say it should be a simple background check for everyone else. But that would still require an agency to police the borders and port of calls, would still require someone to detain those who came in illegally (either by foregoing the background check or those who lie on it). So, basically, the same system we have now, just broadening who is permitted in. But, then they say borders are imaginary and freedom of association, but admit some people shouldn't be let in. So which is it?
I've often said here that it doesn't matter what our immigration policy is as long as migrants can ignore it and literally walk in around it. An orderly, humane, and beneficial immigration policy is dependent on a secure border and strong enforcement.
Yeah. Because without secured borders it's all bullshit anyhow. But it's easier (e.g. lazier) to demonize the border patrol and scream open borders than to actually craft a policy that would work.
Jordan Peterson has commented on how a surfeit of choices can make us less free.
Honestly, I feel the same way. I think trans people are creepy and weird, but not significantly more or less so than a bunch of other groups.
What's causing me to hate their groups is shit like this.
Shit like 'birthing persons' is actually rage-inducing and, furthermore, eventually even that phrase will be considered hate speech since it still draws a line in the sand that means 'man' and 'woman' and that's what these people have a problem with.
I was willing to say dress however you like, fuck whoever you want to (as long as they're consenting adults) but they've taken it to such an absurd level that I'm all for them going back into the closet. Fuck, why do you need a month of jamming this down our throats, holding parades described as family friendly that includes nearly nude individuals participating in BDSM acts in public? When do heterosexuals have parades depicting BDSM? Or men dressed up as dogs being led on a leash by other men, who go up to kids and get petted? And if you have a dick and enter a nude area with women present, and get offended that women get upset, that's fucking bullshit. BTW most nudist colonies and beaches have strict rules about decorum (such as don't state and if Mr Woody is at attention you're going to be asked to leave), because even in those places (which you enter voluntarily) they realize that some behavior isn't acceptable.
I'm increasingly convinced that that's the feature, not a bug.
You know how Antifa works, they have large men shouting horrible insults across the barriers, people throwing water bottles of piss, and wait for someone to react. Then, when someone does they push all the small women to the front of the line and film it so they have propaganda of the other side attacking the poor defenseless little girls.
They're pelting you with piss and insults. Say anything and they'll say "Why do you hate gay people? Bigot!"
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Ukraine launched the most aggressive phase of their hyped counter-offensive overnight.
It doesn't appear to have gone well.
Need moar tanks!
Apparently Australia is giving them F-18's.
The thing is, people don't get, is it takes years to become proficient in the use of equipment such as Abrams, Leopard II, F-16, F/A-18 etc. The fact that anyone actually believes these will be game changers this late in is just astounding. The even harder part will be in integrating these systems into the Ukrainian military, which hasn't exactly shown an aptitude at combined arms. Luckily for them, neither have the Russians, though it matters less when on the defensive rather than offensive.
The presumption is that they'll take existing tank crews, versed in the T72 or the SU-27 (or whatever soviet-era equipment the Ukraine Army uses) and then teach them the new platform. However, generally speaking, you're correct.
The US government is treating this like a video game. *Poof* you now have X # of "Tanks". The logistics to support these platforms is massive. Even IF you could train crews and pilots up to be remotely proficient on these platforms, there are fuel requirements, parts, maintenance, repairs, re-arming, specialized tools etc. The logistics here are significant. It's one thing to sell these weapons to an ally in peacetime when you can deploy military personnel and advisers for a period of years to build up the infra and support systems to keep these platforms maintained... it's entirely another to drop them into a war zone where having troops on the ground is a major no-no, and have them all up and running before Friday.
Everything is about signaling. Nothing is real except for the Ukrainians and Russians dying because Western governments refuse to let Russia and Ukraine negotiate.
And planes... and you and your kids.
The first rule of offensive operations is you don't broadcast your intent, timetable or area of operations. Ukraine has been telling the media since January they were going to launch an offensive in late Spring, gave the general location of the offensive and their stated objectives. Did they think the Russian military couldn't use the internet?
While publicly declaring you don't have enough weapons and ammo to effectuate your plan.
Update:
https://twitter.com/witte_sergei/status/1666826693959630848?t=olW5hdoAmr3ocbdKX0Fm1g&s=19
The thing to remember about the ongoing assaults is that Ukraine is currently fighting to *reach* the Russian fortified belts. All the current combat is taking place several kilometers north of the mapped out echeloned defense. They're currently stuck on the screening line.
They have so far only committed a small portion of their total mech package, and I do expect them to make progress into the Russian defense, but it is an inauspicious start and it's not clear how they can sustain the combat power needed to reach operational depth objectives.
Love the idiot who tried to justify this by comparing it to June 6/7 1944. For fuck sake someone hasn't studied history. Outside of Utah Beach, June 6th operations were pretty uncontested, and even on Utah, we had achieved penetration in depth enough to declare the beachhead secured by the afternoon of June 6th. Yes, we failed to achieve much of the initial time tables, but they were overly optimistic. Also, only one Panzer unit was able to launch an effective counter attack and it eventually failed. For the most part, the Germans couldn't even move panzers to the front because of our airpower (oh and Hitler's stupid orders but even after that it took over 24 hours to move units from Paris to Normandy and even then the units were often scattered and had taken heavy casualties, such that they weren't combat effective). Someone obviously watched Saving Private Ryan and thought the whole battle was like the opening scene (which if they paid attention also showed that despite the casualties the allies managed to push off the beach). Eisenhower said he knew by that afternoon that the mission had been a success. Outside of a Utah, it was never in question from the minute they hit the beach, and even at Utah by noon it wasn't a question anymore. We caught the Germans completely by surprise. Hit them at their weakest point and ran probably one of the (if not the most) successful deception operations in history (so much so, that many Germans continued to consider Normandy mainly a faint for weeks after it was launched). Breaking out of Normandy was a bigger challenge than taking the beaches, but that was more about geography. The bocage country favored the defender even more than normal.
Omaha Beach. The next worst was Gold Beach.
Sorry. You are correct. Omaha. Utah was basically a cake walk. Gold was bad but never really in doubt. Omaha was touch and go for awhile but eventually they were able to overcome the initial resistance and break out of the beachhead. Bradley should have suspended launch on Omaha sooner than he did. As one of the big issues was congestion at the beachhead when resistance proved strong. Also, it didn't help that the initial landings were off their mark and units ended up scattered because of the current.
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1666805839259373569?t=fMRJlHWhuTCZPWkov7Msgg&s=19
NASA warns of “Internet Apocalypse” that would disable internet for months
Let me guess - they expect it to happen a few months before next year’s Presidential election…
[Link]
The internet shutting down would ruin pluggo’s sex life.
Naw, Pluggo is more of a producer than a consumer of those images.
Back to mailing brown envelopes full of polaroids....
How many Gen Z heads would explode?
NASA warns of “Internet Apocalypse” that would disable internet for months
"Warning" or "announcing their plans in advance? I'm pretty sure the WEF also recently "warned" about the possibility recently, so if I were a betting man...
Tyranny.
https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_742d6016-053e-11ee-86e5-9bc49854fb8c.html
Effective immediately, Illinoisans wanting to challenge the constitutionality of state laws or executive actions in state court can only file litigation in two of the state’s 102 counties.
The contentious measure passed both chambers along party lines and says citizens can only file litigation in state court in either Sangamon or Cook counties. Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed the bill Tuesday.
Republican state Rep. Dan Caulkins, R-Decatur, who sued the state in Macon County challenging the state’s gun and magazine ban, said the bill, now law, is similar to the tyranny of King George III from which the founders of the United States declared independence.
“The Democrats today are doing the very same thing. They pass unconstitutional laws to make law-abiding citizens criminals and then they make those same citizens travel hundreds of miles to a kangaroo court that they control,” Caulkins said during debate.
“This is a terrible bill,” Bryant said during debate. “We have circuit courts in this state for a specific reason and that is so that people are able to go to their courts and have their grievances heard. Not so that we can make it more convenient for the person that was mentioned previously which is the attorney general. This is a very bad bill.”
Pritzker signed the bill Tuesday without any fanfare. The law takes effect immediately. Opponents say the measure denies citizens access to court and it’s possible the law could be challenged in federal court.
This, CLEARLY, is a local issue and Reason does not have much need to cover it.
Unlike, say, hookers in Maine. THAT is a big story.
They deliberately ignored the story just to make you angry.
One day you'll learn what selection bias is.
Jesse...without reading his idiotic comment, we all know he is incapable of learning.
(I assume sarcasmic, but SQRSLY is just as likely)
He is pulling the usual Mike bullshit.
sarcasmic 2 hours ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
They deliberately ignored the story just to make you angry.
The things I do not see from him.
Not saying "Things I miss from him" because such things do not exist.
There really isn’t a better way for someone to reveal themselves as an irredeemable piece of shit than having a conversation with JesseAz.
Cite?
When will Illinois start growing bananas?
I think they already have.
"Court shopping" is only bad when ReTHUGliKKKans do it. /sarc
Again, you're acting like locking up more men is somehow a bad thing. I'm pretty sure that's at least part of the point.
https://twitter.com/CIA/status/1666792191057092608?t=ZJuH35_evSuyeauiofpKTw&s=19
CIA's 2023 theme for #Pride Month is WELCO-ME!
Wellness
Equity
LGBTQ+
Community
Openness
ME!
Pride Month is an occasion for all of us at the Agency to pay tribute to the rich history, community, and mission contributions of our LGBTQ+ officers.
#Pride2023
[Pic]
"We need something for the M and the second E!"
"Uhhh, I dunno man just do whatever."
That last part shows that it's really more about ego than anything else.
Did you really expect anything different from an agency, any agency, that names itself "Central Intelligence"?
So the L in "Welcome" stands for another acronym? That means the full name of this theme is "Wellness Equity Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transsexual Queer Community Openness Me." Really rolls off the tongue. Very catchy.
"The extra B is for BYOBB"
Don't bring me into this.
Maybe the best joke in the history of television.
Has there ever been a more self-obsessed group of people than the current leadership and pop culture?
Donald Trump and his associates.
Cite?
None of them demand reworking the entire language, the concept of biology, etc because not doing hurts their feelings.
Just sayin'.
You asked for someone who is “self-obsessed”. Trump is extremely self-obsessed.
Now, you’ve moved the goal post to something else.
Demanding control over the meaning of words used to be a leftist thing, but lately the right has started doing it, too: such as the insistence here over a very restrictive definition of the word, vaccine, and an expansive definition of the word, censorship.
The booming Biden economy
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-applications-jobless-benefits-highest-124346072.html
Buttplug was boasting that the US added 339,000 jobs last month while ignoring the fact that it also lost twice as many, leading to a rise in the unemployment rate.
https://twitter.com/Babygravy9/status/1666758078371450880?t=9gs4XQ_qkNAMZ0zbJjNIDw&s=19
The judicial system is being weaponised extremely quickly. Leftists know exactly what to do to ensure that hated demographics (that's you!) don't get a fair trial. That's why Klint Ludwig -- a man with a long involvement in radical politics -- went on CNN to denounce his grandfather, Andrew Lester, for the shooting of Ralph Yarl. Even though other family members unequivocally disagreed with Klint's characterisation of his grandfather, by saying what he did (his grandfather is a racist obsessed with Q-Anon conspiracy theories), Klint is doing the important work of making it that much harder for his grandfather to get a fair trial.
Leftists understand how important it is to muddy the waters as much as possible before a jury trial. The reality is that in 2023 it's impossible to pick a "neutral" jury that hasn't already been influenced by the media and social media in the particular.
Then there's the problem of leftists actively disguising their political beliefs and activist history during jury selection. This appears to have been a factor in the high-profile case of Daniel Perry.
From my essay, "Blood and water" for @theammind.
[Link]
"Doing the work"
Where have I heard that before?
from the same people that believe "work will set you free"
“Doing the work”
Where have I heard that before?
Almost every cult in history.
https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1666754480350588928?t=-wxXYyj7pZ_qI7XvbLtHFQ&s=19
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has acknowledged that “massive immigration just doesn’t work” as he announced changes to the country’s border control policy that would make it the strictest in the European Union.
[Link]
I'll give Sweden some credit. They try a lot of crazy shit before other countries do, but at least they appear able to acknowledge when it fails. Technocracy works somewhat better when it uses science rather than "The Science" to assess policy.
Makes it all the more insane seeing the US and other places go down the "affirming care" model for gender dysphoria when Sweden figured out what a disaster that was several years ago.
Technocracy works somewhat better when it uses science rather than “The Science” to assess policy.
Also, a relatively monolithic *culture* (not necessarily sex, race, creed, or ethnicity) helps to ensure that even if not everyone agrees on "The Science", they agree to what is, or maybe more importantly what isn't... science.
but diversity is the greatest good and always a strength!
Except for diversity of thought, natch.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson has acknowledged that “massive immigration just doesn’t work” as he announced changes to the country’s border control policy that would make it the strictest in the European Union.
Racist Ultra-MAGA Swedes?
"Women are in a vulnerable position when they are unclothed and/or having treatment while unclothed and we seek to ensure that they feel their privacy and rights are respected," the spa argued, situating this argument in the owners' religious beliefs.
Ahem. "Transwomen are in a vulnerable position when they are unclothed and/or having treatment while unclothed and we seek to ensure that they feel their privacy and rights are respected."
Imagine the humiliation those brave trans women suffer when women react with disgust upon viewing their hairy cock and balls in a spa setting.
The only thing to do now is mandate universal lady dick desensitization. The CDC and NIH will distribute graphic photos that must be included in all commercial and social media, commercial advertising, and K-12 teaching materials. Yard signs are optional.
Could be worse, they could have to suffer the disgust of cis-women viewing hairy cock and balls... WITH SOCKS!
Anyone crazy enough to click that link?
Jeff: "No self-respecting women will ever let a man in socks do the squelchie with her."
Susan and Kate (eavesdropping): [Nods]
Well, that's why they're in for a wax job.
“Transwomen are in a vulnerable position when they are unclothed and/or having treatment while unclothed and we seek to ensure that they feel their privacy and rights are respected.”
Trans"women" who force themselves into spaces where they are not welcome, like actual women's spaces, deserve no respect in return for their lack of respect given. No means no.
there is no such thing as "trans woman".
Ellen/Elliot Paige?
just a male impersonator who is dedicated to her craft.
Like most "trans men", she looks like a boy, not a man.
And acts like a little bitch.
From a strictly aesthetic point of view, his/her transition so far has been like vandalizng a work of art.
One hopes it has helped her/his mental health. From what I know from experience about actors…..
I did a little amateur acting in college alongside theater students. Some of them seemed seriously needy and neurotic. I imagine they might have said some harsh things about the high school debate crowd I was part of. A lead in a production I was in went on to win a Tony, though. He seemed to have his head on straight. No pun intended.
'Essentially, the Maine measure would institute what's known as "asymmetrical criminalization" or the "Nordic Model" of prostitution laws, a scheme criminalizing people who pay for sex but not totally criminalizing those who sell it. This model has become popular in parts of Europe and among certain strains of U.S. feminists.'
Does this mean men are bad and women are good?
It is a bit odd to me that buyers are bad but sellers are not.
I guess explains the slavery issue, too. Logically, African countries should be on the hook for all reparations as they sold the people in the first place.
MISINFORMATION ALERT!!!
bro do you even 1619?
"It is a bit odd to me that buyers are bad but sellers are not"
Especially since this is the opposite of the approach to illegal drugs.
Maybe you mean particular tribes or something. The African nation-states didn’t exist yet.
Nor did current white people.
Correct.
Current white men are expected to PAY those reparations.
They have less culpability than multiple African nations.
First of all, you don’t seem to have noticed, but I’m in agreement with you.
Second, reparations are never going to happen. They’ve been talked about for decades, but there simply is no source of money to actually make reparations. It’s all talk.
Read up on Dahomey.
Does this mean men are bad and women are good?
Depends. Define "men" and "women".
Well, only men can be "real" women. Women are just bodies with female reproductive organs.
Does this mean men are bad and women are good?
*rising intonation* What about gigolos?
Dr Norma Hoeffering? on Donahue? (at 3:24)
SPLC is a hate group.
https://nypost.com/2023/06/08/southern-poverty-law-center-should-include-itself-on-its-hate-list/
For all its claims to profile “hate and antigoverment extremist” outfits, the Southern Poverty Law Center has become nothing more than a hate group itself.
Yes, Florida-based Moms for Liberty (a nonprofit with 280 chapters) is, per SPLC, is “at the forefront” of groups targeting “any inclusive curriculum that contains discussions of race, discrimination and LGBTQ identities.”
These groups — brace yourself! — wear shirts and carry signs that say, “We do NOT CO-PARENT with the GOVERNMENT.”
But the SPLC’s been a menace long before this latest turn. Internally, it’s faced numerous accusations of racial discrimination and sexual harassment. Externally, it’s been sued repeatedly for defamation and even made at least one seven-figure payout to settle such a suit.
In 2012, a real terrorist opened fire at a pro-family group’s headquarters, later admitting that an SPLC listing inspired his choice of targets.
And just this year, one of its attorneys was among 23 “protesters” charged with actual domestic terrorism for hurling a Molotov cocktail at a future Atlanta police-training facility.
But the SPLC promotes good hate.
They hate because they love.
a former intelligence official named David Grusch said that the U.S. government has spent decades secretly recovering “intact vehicles” and “partial fragments” that weren’t made by humans.
Completely credible, given that scientists have recreated the neuralyzer from Men In Black
I often feel like we're living in a post-neuralyzer society.
That's what happens when you try to fight dicks.
Whatever happened to "My private company"?
I guess that only applies to companies complying with government censorship requests and not banning feminine erections.
There's just too many dicks on the dance floor.
Don't blame "climate change" for shitty forest management.
https://nypost.com/2023/06/07/smoky-new-york-isnt-climate-change-its-bad-forest-management/
While New Yorkers have become inured to the pungent smell of cannabis smoke wafting through the streets, the Canadian wildfire smoke currently turning the sky orange is taking our tolerance to new levels.
By Wednesday we were registering the worse air pollution of any major city in the world and COVID mask maniacs were back in their element.
But don’t fall for the propaganda that climate change is to blame.
The situation in Canada is similar to that in Australia, where green ideology and chronic government underfunding mean that the forests currently ablaze have not been managed properly for years.
Instead of dead wood and undergrowth being removed regularly using low-intensity controlled or “prescribed” burns, forests have become overgrown tinderboxes. Fire trails that used to allow first responders easy access to the forest have closed over as vast tracts of land are locked away from humans. Logging and other commercial practices that used to self-interestedly tend to forest health have been phased out.
In 2020, a paper in the journal Progress in Disaster Science warned: “Wildfire management agencies in Canada are at a tipping point. Presuppression and suppression costs are increasing but program budgets are not.”
Canadian indigenous groups also have complained that bureaucratic obstacles hinder their ability to perform the controlled burns they have used for centuries to reduce fuel load, flush out food and regenerate forests.
Well, idiotic laws demanded BY environmentalists does make proper forest management nigh impossible.
Even with proper forest management wildfires are a perfectly natural occurrence.
Far less so, though.
Reason why CA has so many is due to extremely poor forest management. Canada knows they've had problem for a while as well.
How does this affect tranny dancing?
I am impressed that the NYT admits than anything EXCEPT N95 are, well, utterly useless against smoke particles.
The stuff that was to stop COVID germs cannot stop the significantly larger smoke particles.
Receipt: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1304425971714535426
You see a similar article every year when the California wildfires get out of hand.
Canadian indigenous groups also have complained that bureaucratic obstacles hinder their ability to perform the controlled burns they have used for centuries to reduce fuel load, flush out food and regenerate forests.
"Who cares what those savages want? We, their progressive 'betters' will decide what's in their best interests!" /what prog-tards actually think
More like "We never intended to increase forest fires, so it can't be our fault. Let's find some capitalist to blame it on!"
Reminds me of the time someone tried to do a report on how Natives felt about Alaska's wolf management program and they interviewed some old native in a remote village who started talking about how he remembers his dad and uncles going into wolf dens and clubbing wolf pups when caribou hunts were off the year before. Hoping for the crying indian instead got someone who told the truth they didn't want to hear.
Always harder to be green when your belly is empty.
Court rules that naked female spa can't exclude transgender women
What is a transgender woman? If I owned a women-only spa, I'd have a handy pair of bolt cutters and institute pants checks. You want to claim you're a woman? Don't even think about bringing a penis in here with you.
But what if you keep it in your purse?
Obligatory "Detachable Penis" song reference.
Sometimes he (she?) leaves it in the medicine cabinet, but not this time.
He can leave it at home when he thinks it may get him in trouble...
I knew a guy whose wife kept his balls in her purse.
Buttplug and Jeffy smile.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/cheese-pizza-metas-instagram-facilitated-massive-pedophile-network
A comprehensive investigation by the Wall Street Journal and the Stanford Internet Observatory reveals that Meta-owned Instagram has been home to an organized and massive network of pedophiles.
But what separates this case from most is that Instagram's own algorithms were promoting pedophile content to other pedophiles, while the pedos themselves used coded emojis, such as a picture of a map, or a slice of cheese pizza.
"That a team of three academics with limited access could find such a huge network should set off alarms at Meta," said Alex Stamos, the head of the Stanford Internet Observatory and Meta’s chief security officer until 2018, adding that the company has far more effective tools to 'map' its pedophile network than outsiders do.
What's more, Meta accounted for 85% of child pornography reports filed with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, according to the report. That said, "Meta has struggled with these efforts more than other platforms both because of weak enforcement and design features that promote content discovery of legal as well as illicit material, Stanford found."
Producing and distributing CP should be an automatic death penalty upon conviction. No appeals, no jail sentences, no life in prison, no rehabilitation, and trials should be completed in one year or less.
Quick trial, and up the rope you go.
Producing and distributing CP should be an automatic death penalty upon conviction.
Unfortunately a lot of teenagers who "sext" each other have been charged with producing and distributing CP over the years. But I assume you mean actual pedophiles like our resident pederast, pluggo.
For example, Kyle Rittenhouse should never have been the one to put down Joseph Rosenbaum. He should be been put down after he was convicted in Arizona.
"The Court does not minimize the privacy concerns at play..."
I would argue that completely dismissing those concerns goes far beyond minimizing them. It is something to say that the law now requires women to be naked with biological men if they want to enjoy certain services.
This is what the dismissal of what has been contemptuously referred to as "bathroom panic" has wrought. The LGBT ideology running roughshod over freedom of association.
Everyone must now love the ladydick.
Well, it's not gonna lick itself.
Hilariously, those of us with more than two brain cells to rub together saw this coming years ago.
The so-called TERF saw it coming too, but they were too busy being deplatformed for disagreeing to raise much of a stink about it.
Speaking of, one wonder's how J.K. Rowling is doing these days...
I'll say that I don't agree with radical feminism very often, but this is one case where they are absolutely correct. What is being said to women is that men know better than they do what it means to be female even though the specific people we're talking about are literally crazy.
Last I checked, if I identified myself as Napoleon I would not suddenly be in charge of France and yet here we are.
The promotion of trannyism is always a sign of late-stage societies before a collapse comes about. A society that enables and celebrates the denial of biological reality isn't well-equipped anymore to handle other types of realities when they assert themselves--sort of like why California's bullet train was never going to happen.
There's a reason people in third-world countries find this sort of indulgence to be completely bizarre and crazy. It's why the western world is so intent on imposing it there, too.
Rowling is doing fine. She’s hard to cancel considering she is filthy rich and isn’t easily socially intimidated.
So, mike, the vitriol that has been directed at Rowling is just a “conservative victimhood narrative”?
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1666788343189839872?t=WMcGCeSjTRf45WZTj4z7dw&s=19
GRAPHIC VIDEO — 4 children stabbed on a playground France.
The assailant is a Syrian “asylum seeker” aka terrorist.
IMPORTANT: There are *multiple* grown French men in this video. What do they do as defenseless women & children scream in terror while being stabbed?
Guy 1: Run away
Guy 2: Hide on playground
Guy 3: Swing a backpack, run away
Guy 4: Jogs by, does not stop
Guy 5: Films it all
France: What have you done to your men?
Women: This is why masculinity is not “toxic” — a brave, moral man is the difference between life and death.
Always has been. Always will be.
Defend manliness.
[Video deleted]
Too late.
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1666795290408386561?t=JQ6oVL2YhMaf0VWpV5wbmQ&s=19
4 kids and 2 adults were just stabbed at a playground in Annecy, France
The attacker was a Syrian refugee but the media conveniently buries that detail
[Pics]
Maybe "Frenchman" deserves the same asterisk as "Transman" or "Transwoman"
what do cheese eating surrender monkeys mean?
the French?
“A non-story which has no place being debated in the public sphere. Nothing to see here. Move along.” – Billy Binion
Guy 1: Run away
Guy 2: Hide on playground
Guy 3: Swing a backpack, run away
Guy 4: Jogs by, does not stop
Guy 5: Films it all
While it's tempting to point and laugh at the cheese eating surrender monkeys, I'm not sure American men are any better at this point.
Daniel Perry on line 2.
Maybe not the men you are likely to find in an urban playground, but at least in the US it's still legal to defend yourself and others. In some states anyway. And there have been several high profile incidents recently where someone did use force to stop the murderous bad guy.
Q. How many troops does it take to defend France against an invasion?
A. No one knows. It's never been tried.
https://twitter.com/The_WGD/status/1666256035303116800?t=hLcsr0_4tYeuhGgX0Naoig&s=19
This is a Trump style tweet because that community note is way worse than the joke in the tweet.
[Link]
Maine's Legislature Passes Bill To Partially Decriminalize Prostitution
...
Plus: Court rules that naked female spa can't exclude transgender women
I'll pay you $20 to get on your knees and tell me how that women's rights movement is working out for you with your mouth full... and when I say "I'll pay you $20." I mean "You'll take the $20 or I'll just say I'm a woman and make you tell me how it's going on your knees with your mouth full for free."
Invade Canada! Those flappy heads are killing me right now.
I wonder if we'll ever find out what group of rabid, mentally deranged left wing psychopaths is responsible for trying to burn down Canada. Not only are these fires absolutely 100% deliberate arson, but it looks to me like it's almost certainly a pre-planned and coordinated effort taking place.
I'm giving Trudeau and his WEF buddies the benefit of the doubt here and assuming this wasn't their idea and it's some sort of eco-terrorism group.
https://www.westernstandard.news/opinion/slobodian-female-firefighters-planned-burn-goes-awry-in-banff/article_59b0925c-ecfd-11ed-b221-f3c167e42d52.html
Behind a paywall?
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/unexpected-winds-in-banff-cause-prescribed-burn-to-go-out-of-control
>>anyone who pays or attempts to pay a sex worker would still be committing an illegal act.
why has "I paid her to leave" not become the failsafe?
"Elliot Page reveals chilling transphobic attack outside LA hotel: ‘I’m going to f–king gay bash you, fa—t’"
https://nypost.com/2023/06/06/elliot-page-reveals-chilling-transphobic-attack-outside-la-hotel/
See everyone, trans people are under constant threat, as evidenced in this story that definitely happened.
And the story comes out the day her book launched (her because nobody has ever given a rancid shit about dude Page but girl Page had some notable roles).
And, it should be noted, she believed Smollett completely.
lol L.A.? Fresno maybe ...
West Hollywood, no less, which we all know is a hive of transphobic and homophobic danger. The pooner was lucky to make it out of there with her zipper tits intact.
^this. The gayest of gay pride places, in the one of the most liberal cities, potentially the PRIDE capital of the country.
One could say that the above would be almost as farcical as, say, 2 guys walking around with a noose in downtown Chicago saying "this is MAGA country"...
the actors should leave the writing to the writers.
...have you seen what comes out of Hollywood lately? This kind of on-the-nose tripe is basically all modern writers are capable of nowadays as it is.
cartoons, Jeopardy & Real Housewives of New Jersey lol
There is a strike going on. Hey, is he/her/it a scab?
I recall Page going all in on the Jessie Smollett thing. Just saying.
Are the nominations open for the 2023 Smolletts?
Because "I'm going to gay bash you" is obviously something a real person would say.
It actually sounds like something a 2nd grader or a flaming homosexual with no idea how people who aren't flaming homosexuals talk would say.
"This white-cis-hetero male came up to me and said 'I'm going to get to three bases on you!'"
Just like a Trump supporting MAGA-hat wearer (in Chicago, aka "MAGA Country") would say "Aren't you that faggot nigger on Empire?"
Because MAGAheads all watch Empire.
The whole thing really is a clear copy-paste of the Smollet saga with relevant details changed, and even the hilarious out of touch tone of the involved progs assuming that not only do old timey bigots exist in large numbers, in places they definitely would never be, but they also act/talk like the most on-the-nose 1950's caricature of one.
The kind of tone that let's you know not only are they making it up, but they have never actually dealt with anything remotely resembling bigotry other than what was invented in their heads
Did he say whether or not his Subway sandwich survived the attack?
She's also claimed that some Hollywood producer said he was "going to fuck the gay out of her" after she started claiming she was a lesbian.
Now, that's probably more truthful, considering how degenerate the entertainment industry is. She clearly has massive mental health issues, and a lot of them likely stem from being in the industry to begin with, as a cute girl who looked relatively young up until she hit the age-30 wall is going to be a target for lecherous moguls.
"She’s also claimed that some Hollywood producer said he was “going to fuck the gay out of her” "
I'd give it a 25% chance it happened similar to that due to hollywood being loaded with deviant perverts, 25% chance she was hit on but it was much more tame ("hey, maybe you aren't gay, but bi ;)" ), and 50% chance this was also completely made up.
Possible, but given the source, im highly skeptical
I thought I remember her narcing out Brett Ratner as the guy, when they were working on X-Men 3. Ratner's a creep in his own right, so I'd put it about 75% that it actually happened.
Don't be antisemitic
25% - It happened legit Hollywood deviant style.
25% - She was hit on but it was much more tame.
50% - It was completely made up.30 % - Grab them by the pussy.
20% - Rape them through a broken glass coffee table.
10% - (Overheard) "Have you seen Geraldine Page? Sometimes she looks a little like a man." "Yeah, but if she were still alive today *I'd* fuck her brains out."
Probably one of Dave chappelles “violent bigots” that tony warned us about.
" . . . can't exclude transgender women . . . "
Since there is no such thing as a "transgender woman", what's the big deal?
Men are men.
Women are women.
Neither can change to the other.
Science.
Delusional men who think (or claim) they are women are still men.
The earth is not flat.
So in the future, the hooker charges for changing the sheets, the sex is free.
Problem solved.
or finish up, then decide to identify as a trans woman, and kindly hand her the bill, citing bigotry if she refuses to pay you
Wait, I thought cooking and laundry are compensated with jewelry, getting her to shut up and go away costs money regardless and sex is free (OK, price of meal and some booze)... huh. Learn something new everyday.
You should host a radio call-in show.
So sex segregation is unlawful.
What does this mean for high schools if this ruling is upheld on the merits by ther Washington Supreme Court?
What does this mean for high schools if this ruling is upheld on the merits by ther Washington Supreme Court?
Shootings. Many, many more shootings of school administrators that would force such policies on HS kids. [fingers crossed]
Examples are instructive.
It means exactly what you would expect, in that if one claims to be transgender they must allow you into those sex segregated spaces even though it makes the entire idea of sex segregated spaces entirely farcical.
Basically, all they really know is that they must cater to the transgender people (less than 1% of the population) even if it means alienating another group (about 50% of the population).
There is no way that goes well in the end, but I imagine they know this and simply don't care. After all, what are those women going to do? Vote Republican?
It means exactly what you would expect, in that if one claims to be transgender they must allow you into those sex segregated spaces even though it makes the entire idea of sex segregated spaces entirely farcical.
Well, it begs the question, as I asked below:
What is the purpose of sex-segregated spaces?
So you perverts don’t use “I’m a woman” as an excuse to pop a stiffy in front of women who are changing their clothes or using the bathroom.
Privacy. Modesty.
Not sure how demanding trannies be allowed in there is NOT violating the NAP wholesale, but I'm sure you'll justify it.
What if a boy simply wants to watch girls change in the locker room?
Fuck. There was more than one girl I would have dressed in drag to see change when I was in high school. What teenage, heterosexual boy wouldn't? That's the problem with self identifying.
CNN chair Chris Licht has been fired.
"The Atlantic published a 15,000-word profile extensively documenting his stormy tenure. Mr. Licht had spent hours with the writer, Tim Alberta, and his unguarded comments that CNN had overhyped its coverage of the coronavirus pandemic and the Trump presidency further rankled the network’s anchors and rank-and-file."
The great righteous purge 2.0. Or is it 3.0?
House GOP drops plan to hold FBI director in contempt
Seeing as he was very obviously in contempt, an offer must have been made that they couldn't refuse.
an offer must have been made that they couldn’t refuse.
They just showed them their own browser histories and subtly implied that a copy would sent to their wives and to the media if they don't back off.
Or they finally got invited to the Star Chamber.
REPORT: Biden Admin to Indict Donald Trump Over Classified Docs Soon; Charges Revealed
"Donald Trump has reportedly been notified that he faces imminent indictment by Joe Biden’s Department of Justice. Sources suggest that the indictment is scheduled to take place “next week.” Jack Smith, the special counsel appointed by current Attorney General Merrick Garland to probe the actions of the former president, is expected to press charges against Trump for the offense of “gathering, transmitting, or losing” national defense information."
“'Gathering, transmitting, or losing' national defense information"... At a time when he was the sitting president...
These people have lost their minds. I sorta suspect that they want civil war, because this is exactly how you get one.
He should have kept the papers in a locked garage with a corvette.
every person on any jury knows this.
Didn't Trump get impeached for supposedly using his office to ask for an investigation of a supposed rival who hadn't even announced yet? Didn't Trump announce his run officially? Didn't Biden also get caught with classified material, from when he was Vice President? Didn't Hillary? Didn't Obama? Why aren't they being prosecuted? Oh because they state Trump was obstructing (while his lawyers felt they were still negotiating with the archives when the DoJ decided to launch their much publicized raid)? I'm not saying Trump is innocent, just when it appears like one rule for thee and one rule for me that's when people tend to give up and get violent.
Americans today don't have the balls for a civil war. If they did, COVID fascism would have started one.
We took shit from the crown for how long before they finally got fed up? It got really bad after the French-Indian/7 Years War but several of the problems predated that period.
https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1666367380891598849
us gov borrowed 359 BILLION on day one of no more debt ceiling.
The Ukraine needs moar money.
What's that student loan total?
Louisiana is the latest state to pass a ban on gender transition treatment for minors. "If the measure becomes law, Louisiana would join 17 states that have enacted bans or severe restrictions this year on access to transition care for minors,"
This is the way. 17 states and counting. keep it up.
transition care
It's not "care".
FFS, a stripper who goes to the plastic surgeon to get bigger titties, or a nose-job in hopes of increasing her tips is not seeking "care", she's seeking cosmetic surgery. The only way you can continue to call cosmetic surgery and other body transforming injections as "care" is to conflate it with disfigured WWI soldiers receiving cosmetic surgery to try to give them a more normal appearance. If we're trying to equate a child who believes they're "in the wrong body" because a teacher or school counsellor got to them with a disfiguring war injury, that tells you how far from reason we've strayed.
One of those weird new usages that suddenly enters the lexicon. Did it start with "abortion care" or "transgender care" I can't remember.
Abortions are reproductive care. But kinda the opposite of reproduction.
I'm all for abortion being legal, but come on. A small proportion of abortions are actually necessary medical care, but for the most part it's last resort birth control because someone oopsied.
So you trust politicians more than doctors to decide what is a valid medical treatment?
Appeal to authorities
They are both a type of appeal.
Wanting doctors to decide what is a valid medical treatment is an appeal to authority, yes.
Wanting politicians to decide what is a valid medical treatment is an appeal to force, or an appeal to the mob, depending on how you look at it.
So which appeal are you going with here?
There is considerable evidence that "gender affirming care" theory is, at its root, based on an ideologically motivated quackery. See John Money.
"Don't look at me!" isn't the one appealing to authority, dip.
WPATH is not a valid authority pedo.
I'd trust either before trusting you.
Good thing I am not asking you to trust me. I am not qualified to decide on your health care. That is part of being a libertarian - having the humility to know that I don't have all the answers for how to run your life.
So why do you trust politicians over doctors?
Never said I trusted either. Just before you. And what if the person is both a doctor and a politician? We do have some of those.
And what if the person is actually a bear in a trunk?
Got it, you're just here to troll.
You make it too easy with your love of straw.
lol hey Kettle, you're black! ~~ Pot
False dilemma.
Okay, what is the alternative?
A bear politician in a doctor's trunk.
Another false dilemma.
No, THAT is the false dilemma.
if you're going to have politicians make laws that limit what kids can do because they are too young and also protect kids from what adults want to do with them ... then yes, preventing trans treatment abuse is on the table.
if you want full anarchy then by all means, propose it. I myself prefer total anarchy. But i know for a fact based on all your commie posts you arent a friend of unfettered liberty for all. it seems that literally the only thing you believe people would be free to do without government interference is to chop of their sons' cocks.
I myself prefer total anarchy.
Really? Under a total anarchism regime, gender reassignment surgery would be completely legal for everyone, including kids.
And you, your ilk, and the other perverts abusing children would be quickly, and permanently, put down.
indeed.
but the point is that in a world where laws are in place to prevent abuse to children, preventing gender surgeries is absolutely on the table.
So you favor an anarchist world in which gender reassignment surgery for kids would be legal. And yet, in today's world, you favor laws that ban gender reassignment surgery for kids.
So help my 'weak mind' understand this. What is the intellectual basis for your anarchist position?
Preferring something in the real world while hoping for a perfect world is something you do in regards to immigration.
You support unfettered illegal immigration in spite of our welfare state, when the state's existence makes unfettered illegal immigration a death sentence.
So, tell me where you disagree with this line of reasoning:
Should violations of the NAP be illegal? Yes. Should violations of the NAP be illegal even if the violations are by parents against children? Yes. Should valid medical procedures be considered violations of the NAP if all parties fully consent? No. Should valid medical procedures be considered violations of the NAP if they are on children and all parties fully consent? No.
Should violations of the NAP against children be illegal even if they are rationalized as a “medical procedure” that is invalid? Yes.
So if you agree with the above, the question here isn’t whether violations of the NAP against children ought to be illegal – we both agree – the question is whether gender reassignment surgery ought to be considered a valid medical procedure for those individuals who have been thusly diagnosed.
Your deference to the "experts" is pathetic to behold.
I can "thusly" diagnose anything I want and claim it's valid.
I have diagnose that children who are considered ugly get shunned so my "Valid medical procedure" is they should have their faces removed and wear a plastic mask for the rest of their lives.
who are you to argue with my expertise?
Your deference to the “experts” is pathetic to behold.
Who else should I consult when it comes to medical matters? My Facebook feed?
I can “thusly” diagnose anything I want and claim it’s valid.
That is the anarchist option that you claim to support above. Please make up your mind on what you really support.
The sign of a weak mind is the inability to compartmentalize and understand simple if-then logic.
Is GAC a physical violation or not? Permanent side effects of a child without informed consent? You said that it was for pedophilia.
I don't trust either of them as a group to do so.
Seems to me, there are three options here:
1. Let each individual decide what is a valid medical treatment.
2. Let doctors decide
3. Let politicians decide
#1 is the most libertarian-friendly option, but that also means legalizing virtually everything that most here are complaining about - gender reassignment surgery, female genital mutilation, testosterone supplements for teen boys, diet pills for anorexic teen girls, you name it, because what's "valid" is completely in the eye of the beholder.
So if #1 is right out, then it comes down to either #2 or #3, or some other option that I didn't present yet.
1. Individual in this case is a child.
2. The Doctors do not provide informed consent and often lie to the child and parents. See whistleblower testimony from patients, hospitals, and parents.
3. Medical regulations have always been done at the state level retard. There is no long term benefit shown in any long term study for GAC. Which is why Europe has pulled back from it.
Every argument you make is a lie to cover foe the left.
Sometimes shit is just bad. #1 is the right answer, but it's tricky when children are involved.
The big problem here is that the people promoting the trans treatments are getting way ahead of both science and society on this. There is no good evidence that the hormones, surgery, etc. will produce good results in the long term. Many people believe there is a strong case that such treatments given to children are abusive, fraudulent and harmful. If that is the case, then there is a very reasonable case for legislation against such treatments for minors.
It may surprise you, but communities maintain the right to police themselves, it's part of free association.
I do not agree with 'collective rights'.
Individuals are the ones endowed with inalienable rights, not communities.
please. you're not fooling anyone
Where have I advocated for collective rights elsewhere?
Except the police shooting unarmed conservatives.
What then, is the maximum scale of free association? Give me a maximum number.
After all, corporations are collectives, as are all institutions.
Jeff. You keep claiming valid medical procedures, proper informed consent, and robust mental diagnosis...
Did you see Matt Walsh showing his producer get a designation of dysphoria in under 22 minutes despite stating directly he wasn't dysphoric? Or are you still ignoring facts?
Having MD after your name does not mean that your judgements about morals, ethics, the law, or philosophy of government are superior. It also does not mean you are free from self-serving motivations, or that you have empathy. It doesn't even make you a scientist. It merely means you are trained in the techniques of allopathic medicine.
FREE MINDS
Female spa can't exclude transgender women, court says. A Korean spa for women, where patrons are "typically fully naked" in many areas and required to be naked for certain services, is legally barred from excluding transgender women with male genitalia, a court has ruled.
So... this appears under "free minds". Whole lot of force and subversion of freedom of association here.
"Jerk off the girldick, TERF!"
But the sacred "transwoman" does not have to endure the mental anguish of being told that having a penis means you are not considered a woman by the people around you for activities involving semi-public nudity.
That one's mind is made free.
If you think being told is the only way naked women inflict anxiety and/or mental subjugation on penis-havers you haven't spent very much time around naked women. Or clothed women.
The Korean spa issue seems as good an opportunity as any to raise the question:
What are the reasons, other than an appeal to tradition, to have sex-segregated public spaces?
And note I wrote "sex-segregated" instead of "gender-segregated".
Because this entire case seems to revolve around the distinction between sex and gender. That because this person is biologically a man but adheres to the gender associated with women, that most people here believe that this person should be told to obey a sex-segregation regime, not a gender-segregation regime.
Because people with vaginas don’t want to be raped by people with penises.
What is the evidence of a higher likelihood of rape from trans-women in cis-women bathrooms?
Maybe this, Jeffy:
https://wjla.com/features/i-team/teen-suspect-found-guilty-in-loudoun-county-public-school-stone-bridge-high-bathroom-assault
The 7News I-Team has learned that the teen suspect in a sex assault at Stone Bridge High School in Loudoun County in May has been found guilty on all charges. The Loudoun County Sheriff’s Department confirmed earlier this month that a sexual assault did happen inside a bathroom at Stone Bridge High School on May 28. They said in a statement Wednesday that they arrested a 14-year-old boy in the case.
Sentencing on those charges will happen after a Loudoun County Judge determines the outcome of the second set of charges against the same teen which includes a sexual battery that occurred this month at Broad Run High School. That could be as early as November.
The male individual involved identified as "female".
Congratulations, you found one example.
Even one example is one too many. However, it's but one among many, and one of the most publicized ones at that.
So, do tell, how does that bear jump out of the trunk?
"Even one COVID death is one too many. Therefore, let's have lockdowns!" Amirite?
So, do tell, how does that bear in the trunk thing work again?
Ya know, I now appreciate the "bears in trunks" analogy a lot more. Because it has now become a sign that you all are out of serious arguments and are now just launching juvenile insults. So when you bring up "bears in trunks" it is a good sign for me to know that you are essentially conceding the argument.
No, Jeffy, it shows how your arguments are crap.
There is evidence that putting intact males in women's prisons results in rape.
As well as just being a creep,.
Why exactly should there be gender segregated spaces but not sex segregated ones?
I have no idea what the rationale is for segregating by gender identity or why that should pass legal muster.
What are the reasons, other than an appeal to tradition, to have sex-segregated public spaces?
So you perverts don’t use “I’m a woman” as an excuse to pop a stiffy in front of women who are changing their clothes or using the bathroom.
What are the reasons, other than an appeal to tradition, to have sex-segregated public spaces?
What do you mean by "public"?
Well, public as in a public accommodation.
the owner of the accommodation is the one who decides. problem solved. Here we see you once again revealing your complete disregard for actually valuing liberty other than the liberty to chop of a child's cock.
Take a look at japanese trains these days, there are cabs specifically for women because they were tired of men who couldn't control themselves.
It obviously won't stop all rape/grope/molestation/harassment, but good God , at least pretend that people are capable of being bad.
What are the reasons, other than an appeal to tradition, to have sex-segregated public spaces?
People want them. What other reason do you need?
Yes, but those people are bigots.
Well obviously people want them. I am asking for the reasons behind their desires.
If your answer is 'people don't need to justify the exercise of their liberty', then that's a fair answer.
"Well obviously people want them. I am asking for the reasons behind their desires."
Stop being obtuse.
There is a very basic reason people want sex protected spaces...because men and women are different. Men are larger than women, stronger, faster (all on average as a population of course) and have historically had a propensity for bad behavior sexually with women. So they a bad track record, and all of the physical advantages they need to carry out whatever urges they have.
This of course results in women feeling unsafe, because they aren't idiots.
I guess make the argument to stop sex segregating prisons while we are at it? I mean, go ahead. Even if its just non-violent criminals...go ahead and abolish mens/womens prisons and see how much rape happens in the first week...hell the first day.
Can we stop, as a species, having to defend water being wet, the sky being blue, and the earth being round to the most retarded and disingenuous members, who clearly have ill intent?
There is a very basic reason people want sex protected spaces…because men and women are different. Men are larger than women, stronger, faster (all on average as a population of course) and have historically had a propensity for bad behavior sexually with women. So they a bad track record, and all of the physical advantages they need to carry out whatever urges they have.
This is all true at least on some level, and yet I also observe that as a general rule, men aren't raping every woman that they see. In fact, if you were to count up all of the different times that men and women interact on a daily basis, how many of those interactions result in rape? Or even sexual assault, by whatever loose standard you wish to use to define it? Very very few. So on this measure, actually, men have a very GOOD track record. Men have (in general) the strength to overpower women and have their way with them, and in the vast majority of interactions, DON'T do so.
So the story is more complicated than that.
in how many of those scenarios are the women naked, and expecting to only be among other women?
So, let's examine some of the reasons why you or I don't rape every woman we see, even though we have the physical ability to do so:
- It's immoral
- If caught we would be severely punished
- We would be unfaithful to our committed relationships
- We would be harming our friends and families who would have to deal with the aftermath
- We would be harming the victim and her friends and family
- We would lose our circle of friends who would identify us as rapists instead of as friends
All of those same reasons apply whether the man and woman are naked or not.
Now I am NOT arguing that if naked men and women are put together into the same locker room that everything will work out and be peachy-keen. What I AM arguing is that the story is more complicated that this quasi-'biological essentialism' that your team seems to be arguing.
This 'biological essentialism', that I have observed, is that you all seem to be asserting that one's biology determines, if not exclusively, then overwhelmingly, one's social direction in life. That since a man has a lot of testosterone, that is what drives him then to 'act like a man', which means adopting the social conventions associated with men. If a biological man chooses to 'identify as a woman' it can only be because he is acting contrary to the demands of his biology, deluded, mentally ill, and should be kept away for kids because he's sick in the head and probably a pervert. That's the general tone of the argument that I'm getting from you all. Feel free to correct this if I'm wrong. That biology ultimately determines everything when it comes to gender identity.
But if that's the case, then it seems to me that this argument denies free will. Yes, men have a lot of testosterone, but men are not mere slaves to the hormone - we are free to make choices despite what our primal urges dictate. Hence, men generally don't rape every woman that they see. In fact, the men who do nothing but submit to their urges and rape every woman that they see, those are the ones who are frequently labeled as 'mentally ill', certainly not 'normal'.
So it seems to me, the real question for you is, to what extent do you think human beings really do have free will when it comes to their gender identity?
So it seems to me, the real question for you is, to what extent do you think human beings really do have free will when it comes to their gender identity?
To the extent they don't impose that denial of biological reality on others.
Of course the vast majority of men don't rape and the vast majority of interactions between men and women are perfectly fine. But there are a lot of people in the world and a lot of interactions and it only takes one of them to get a person raped. Getting raped once in your life is still pretty traumatic and damaging experience as far as I can tell. So some precautions are reasonable. And discomfort with males being in female designated spaces, especially where women are naked and make themselves physically vulnerable is quite understandable.
What are the reasons, other than an appeal to tradition, to have sex-segregated public spaces?
Men tend to leer at nude women. It makes women feel uncomfortable. It's a reality.
My ex wife told me a story a couple of years ago that might shed light on this issue. My ex wife found out there was a nude beach here locally. She said she kind of likes swimming in the nude, so she thought she'd check it out. Now, I'll just say this, my ex is... um, a bit above the "average" on the attractive scale. Let's just say she has definitely gotten a lot of attention from men over her adult life, and that was fully clothed.
So one day, she thought she'd go over and check it out. No sooner had she disrobed, some creepy dude had come over to her and started chatting her up about where she parked. When she told me this story, I laughed and said, "Umm, yeah, the number of times a dude has come up to me while I'm on any beach to ask me about where I parked is exactly zero".
"Exactly" she said. So she never went back.
These are the little uncomfortable moments that women have to deal with. If men didn't like to look at women, there wouldn't be any pornography online. It's reality.
Men are more rapey than women. That's a fact. Men are more aggressive than women. That's a fact. Men are more violent than women. That's a fact. So for fuck's sake, can they have a little space where they can take a shower or be unclothed without having to worry about these facts?
Men are more rapey than women. That’s a fact. Men are more aggressive than women. That’s a fact. Men are more violent than women. That’s a fact.
I agree that these are statistical facts. But what is the explanation? Is it due to sex, or to gender? Meaning, is it due to the biological hormones, or is it due to socialization and social roles?
It is true that testosterone tends to create aggressive tendencies, and men have more testosterone than women. However, it is also the case that we are not unthinking animals, we have free will, so we have the ability to choose to refrain from raping every woman that we see.
So, suppose there is a trans woman, who is not "faking it" to get a cheap thrill, who has genuinely socially transitioned to being a woman, has even taken hormone treatments, and completely acts and behaves like a woman, except this trans woman has not yet undergone gender reassignment surgery so still has a penis. Should this person be considered a danger to cis women in private spaces? Is the likelihood of *this person* raping or assaulting a cis woman in a bathroom the same as the likelihood of any cis man doing so?
Jeffy, that person is still male no matter what he does. Medicine cannot craft the organs to function as real ones do. That part below will never be more than an open wound that constantly requires attention of remain open. The guy will never have a clitoris either, removing from him any possible satisfaction or stimulation from sexual activity. He will also maintain his bone structure thus making him "male" to any future archaeologists and anthropologists. He will also maintain his Y chromosome and everything that comes with it, including any sex-based issues like color-blindness.
That person is still a biological male, yes. I agree with you.
I am asking if that person, described above, should be considered just as much of a threat to the safety of cis women in private women's only spaces as any cis man.
Trannies are extreme perverts, so yes they are more likely to rape women than normal men.
Begone from this earth, tumor.
I agree that these are statistical facts. But what is the explanation? Is it due to sex, or to gender? Meaning, is it due to the biological hormones, or is it due to socialization and social roles?
It’s due to biological differences and 60 million years of evolution. Men aren’t physically stronger than women because my elementary school gave me subtle messaging making me stronger “in my mind” it’s because nature made me that way. You know, the way a male lion or tiger or bear is considerably larger than the females of the species.
So, suppose there is a trans woman, who is not “faking it” to get a cheap thrill, who has genuinely socially transitioned to being a woman, has even taken hormone treatments, and completely acts and behaves like a woman, except this trans woman has not yet undergone gender reassignment surgery so still has a penis. Should this person be considered a danger to cis women in private spaces? Is the likelihood of *this person* raping or assaulting a cis woman in a bathroom the same as the likelihood of any cis man doing so?
That's an almost impossible question to answer, so what society has done is sex-segregate spaces to avoid the problem altogether.
It’s due to biological differences and 60 million years of evolution. Men aren’t physically stronger than women because my elementary school gave me subtle messaging making me stronger “in my mind” it’s because nature made me that way. You know, the way a male lion or tiger or bear is considerably larger than the females of the species.
The reason that men are in general physically stronger than women is due to biology, yes. But it is also true that human beings have free will, and men have the ability to choose not to rape every woman (or man) that they see.
That’s an almost impossible question to answer, so what society has done is sex-segregate spaces to avoid the problem altogether.
It is a difficult problem to answer, yes, but not impossible. The previous solution has been based on an assumption of a type of 'biological essentialism': that one's gender identity is determined entirely by biology (sex). So, segregate people by sex, and all of the social characteristics associated with that sex are segregated along with it. So all the violent men are in one place, and all of the dainty women are in another place. But that assumption really isn't valid. There is no necessary reason why a biological male can't adopt the social qualities of women, or why a biological female can't adopt the social qualities of men.
Dude, men can already cook, clean, sew, etc., and women can already play sports, operate machinery, and run offices. If you're trying to claim the "social qualities" make them masculine or feminine, then you're quite Victorian in your outlook.
Jeff --- YOU are asking for the change.
YOU need to explain why the change is needed. YOU have to demonstrate how it is better than what we have now.
We do not have to justify the status quo. Those wish to change it have to explain why we should.
Progressives: "Justify the status quo that has developed and is a well described result of millions of years of evolution, and is easily observable to anyone who isnt lying to push an agenda"
Also progressives: "Trust the science"
gender ... is determined entirely by biology.
Here is the reason, because no one should be forced by the government to view another person nude if they don't choose to. Period. If a woman doesn't want to see a naked dick, that's her right. You want to show your naked dick, find someone who is willing to view it. Otherwise, you have violated their rights, ergo, it violates the NAP. Especially when the fucking government is the one using force to introduce dick into a place where women go only expecting to see other tits and pussy. If you don't like that, build your own fucking spa where dicks and pussy can be viewed equally. Shit why is this so hard for someone who claims to be a fucking individualist libertarian to grasp? We don't call him LyingJeffy for nothing.
This private business says no dicks on the premises. The government says we'll force you to allow dicks on the premises rather you want them or not. LyingJeffy: that doesn't violate the NAP. Keeping out dicks violates the NAP. And he wonders why people think he is not a true libertarian. Remember he also did the whole if you don't like internet censorship build your own internet defense, even after it has been revealed the government was coercing them into censoring. If LyingJeffy ever actually states a libertarian principles, believe me, it's entirely by accident.
Remember we aren't discussing a case where the government banned dicks in pussy places against the owners wishes, were discussing the government forcing the owners to allow dicks into pussy places. There can be no libertarian defense of the latter, only libertine defense. There are a lot of libertines who believe they are libertarians. They are invariably wrong but they wholeheartedly believe it.
Essentially, the Maine measure would institute what's known as "asymmetrical criminalization" or the "Nordic Model" of prostitution laws,
What's interesting here is this is no longer really a fight between social conservatives and liberals or "the left" it is an internecine fight between various wings of feminism.
As best as I can tell, most social conservatives are probably satisfied with the status quo: to keep prostitutions illegal. However, most seem satisfied with arresting the customers (johns/buyers) and releasing the sellers-- aka, the prostitute. This largely puts them in alignment with the feminists that also propose this solution-- who believe that prostitution is effectively exploitation, and the buyers are either part of the exploitation, or benefitting from those who are exploiting the prostitutes.
However, feminists are very schizophrenic on this issue, and they're going to hammer out their differences between each other. For instance, in the UK, the parties and political entities that support the idea that "sex work is work" and should be uncontroversial all supported a bill to make it illegal to trade sex for rent during COVID. This tells you that despite their rhetoric, they don't truly believe "sex work is... just work". It seems to me, that feminism writ large is unable to let go of the overarching idea that women are universally oppressed and exploited, and therefore are reluctant to fully let go of the criminalization angle of prostitution-- even the "Nordic" model. And my ultra-progressive political district is an example of that.
^Yup.
The sexual revolution, modern hook-up culture, easy access to abortion, legal sex work. Feminists are having to square having women "liberated" to enjoy essentially the care-free fucking that men would enjoy (if left unchecked), the resulting change in dynamic between men and women (men overwhelmingly win here, as if they are desirable, they are inundated with naked women, unlimited care-free sex at the touch of a button on their smart phone, free of consequence...women are giving up their trump card here for one of the men's low plays), and they end up confused as to whether women are being empowered by all this (which in theory they are, as they have less social constraints) or end up being oppressed and used (which you can definitely make an argument that is happening).
I have a feeling a lot of free, empowered, liberated women who spent their 20-30's fucking whoever, being a sex worker, getting abortions as needed and lived their best feminist approved life...will be the one's who in their 40-50's as a lonely childless spinster, feel themselves to have been used, abused, and oppressed victims of the men who used them as a cock receptacle and couldn't have cared less about them.
Why doesn't "My body, my choice" apply to sex workers and johns?
Because choice means abortion.
“A federal court is allowing Washington state's ban on AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles to be enforced as lawsuits against the ban play out.”
But if you want to waggle your peepee at women in a Korean spa, that’s all right.
“I won’t back down on helping hard working folks. That’s why I’m vetoing this bill.”
So, taking actual working folks’ tax dollars and giving them to slackers is helping them?
Must be the woke dictionary meaning.
To be fair, he has dementia.
"hard working?". I thought the "pause" was to help unemployed folks. Dr. Jill's husband is confused (as usual).
The solution is to make student loan debt dischargable under bankruptcy, like any other debt. Let the courts decide on a case-by-case basis if particular individuals should reasonably be expected to pay all their debts.
What about all the hard working people who will have to pick up the tab? Guess they're the wrong kind of hard working people.
>But keeping sex work customers criminalized keeps in place many of the harms of total criminalization. The sex industry must still operate underground, which makes it more difficult for sex workers to work safely and independently. Sex workers are still barred from advertising their services. Customers are still reluctant to be screened. And cops still spend time ferreting out and punishing people for consensual sex instead of focusing on sex crimes where someone is actually being victimized.
The purpose of these laws is to prevent sex workers from being prosecuted if they report trafficking or crimes against them. The laws aren’t *supposed* to help them stay in the job voluntarily. Of course the law doesn’t help prostitutes make a living at prostitution–it isn’t supposed to. Any benefit to actual voluntary sex workers is completely incidental to the benefit to the intended targets.
People should be allowed to rent fuckholes from any willing person.
been singing Blame Canada! all week.
This air is what we get every year here I guess when it hits New York it's extra special. Btw can't wait - maybe they have say masks will work for this, when we had announcements around here in pre covid times they would only make it worse.
Both our coastal areas are fucked (with the exception of Newfoundland, the 3 territories, Texas and Florida), so here's to the great North American middle.
I wonder if sending their smoke our way is part of their plan.
Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do.....
For more detail visit the given link..........>>> http://Www.SalaryApp1.com
What about snapper?
A Crab Bucket would be the worst of the options, since here the crabs are pulling you under. 🙂
Fair.
IMO, the US is bluest in urban areas (and a few swaths in the northeast). Even most of California (by area) is moderate to red.
We could try dividing by county. Not very practical but it could be entertaining.
Exactly. Welcome to the club, New Yorkers.
yeah, like two weeks ago it was so bad here in Northeast Montana, that even at work (a medical facility with a HEPA filter) you could smell it. But hey, it's the Armageddon now that it's hitting NYC, they won't shut up about it.
Libertine not libertarian. And morally twisted.
This is an intellectual exercise. Maybe you should sit this one out.
In other words, something you're quite unqualified for, Jeffy. Intellectual, you are not.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart ......
SITE. ——>>> cashdollar12.com</a
Remember, that those New Yorkers are simultaneously the toughest people around and also the most sensitive and fragile.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart ......
SITE. ——>>> cashdollar12.com</a
all ages, sexes and conditions.
No, they're targeting gay children.
The division is even more granular than counties. In most areas, the split is neighborhood by neighborhood. "Red states" v. "Blue States" is meaningless.
It's a giant chemtrail.
Yes, that and the song that started all the trouble, “shut your fucking face, uncle fucker”.
"Flame Canada"?
Here is the simple answer: because women don't want to look at dicks unless they choose to. The government shouldn't force them to. Jeff claims to be a libertarian but here he is forcing women to view dicks via government fiat. Notice this is a private business where women expect to be nude among other women. They go there with the expectation that they won't see a dick. Why the fuck should the government force them to see a dick they didn't choose to see? That has got to be one of the most unlibertarian takes Jeffy has ever come up with (and it's a pretty long fucking list, so that takes some doing). Note here when the government forces someone to do something they don't want, such as view dicks they don't want to view, then there can be no fucking libertarian argument for it. As soon as the government forced this business to comply against their will, the NAP was violated. Period. Sometimes government force is necessary but that still doesn't make it libertarian. End of fucking discussion.
Trudeau is an ass spelunker who can eat penguin shit.
In MAGA States, those are only fished by hand. 😉
Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler, and Alek Skarlatos holding on line 7 from Paris...
Jeff claims to be a libertarian but here he is forcing women to view dicks via government fiat.
Lying Soldiermedic is lying. Show us where I demanded forcing anyone to view anyone's dicks.