I don’t know if right-wing radical feminism in America is necessarily going to be trans-exclusive. Transmedicalist if it isn’t, for sure, but there are plenty of right wing grifters who also happen to be trans women.
The mainstream facist right already have transphobia cornered as a brand, so being trans-inclusive might be key to turning some discontent into a real political movement.
Can I go on the record here as saying this is sexist bullshit?
Scouts letting girls in does not make them somehow not “boy-friendly”. It just lets dads and moms and brothers bring their daughters and sisters to do “boy-things”
He had no business being there ANYWAY.
And Congress didn’t “verify” anything. It was a rote formalism with about as much real power regarding the election as the coronation of the king of England.
Okay, so who filled these rolls in the NYC Mayor’s Race?
Cuomo, who was endorsed by the outgoing mayor, was the establishment. Mamdani, who ran an insurgent campaign to beat both Adams and Cuomo in the ranked-choice primary, was the opposition.
That the choice was either Cuomo or Mamdani was so obvious that the leadership of the Republican party endorsed Cuomo over his own party’s nominee.
That’s not what happened in the primary…
The DNC primary was not a winner-take-all election. We could call them “single ballot plurality wins” or “first past the post” if the difference is confusing to you.
And then when your candidate loses you’re going to come back here and yell at me for voting wrong. Hell, even when you win, you’re yelling that I’ve voted wrong.
Where the fuck did I say that? Go ahead and waste your vote all you want. Sometimes both plausible winners suck, and “they both are equally bad” is a perfectly fine fucking message.
Just don’t expect any rhetorical accolades for voting “either” from the rest of us.
Essentially every winner-take-all election comes down to the establishment and the opposition. Either you like the team in charge and vote for them, want them replaced and vote for the most likely challenger, or find both choices equivalent and do something else with your vote.
NYC’s mayor election is a great example. Every adult who looked at polling knew that it would either be Mamdani or Cuomo, and those who still voted for someone else were communicating very effectively that both choices were equivalent to them.
Look, you can do whatever the hell you want to with your vote. Spoil it, waste it on a “third party” vanity campaign, or just skip the election. Just don’t pretend that your wasted vote is somehow not a declaration that whomever wins is as good to you as the runner up.
In a winner-take-all election, anything less than a vote for the runner up is an endorsement of the winner.
You’re not “refusing to take part” in the election, you’re just voting “either is fine by me.”
deleted by creator
It’s not toxic masculinity to view large male genitals as more masculine. Sure, it’s sexist small-minded heteronormative bullshit, but it’s not toxic masculinity.
(Toxic masculinity as generally used refers to ideas about how men or boys should behave which are not compatible with either a healthy society or an individual’s mental health. )
(There’s some variance on this where it shares some overlap with “hyper masculine” folks who have unusual presentations of characteristics usually caused by the male sex hormone, but I believe smaller genitals are also a potential consequence of excess steroids or testosterone.)
While you’re exactly right on the topic, your timing’s a bit off.
Racist American assholes have been lying about the civil war since 1865.
I’d like to see widely-citable sourcing for the claims that he apologized and actually covered the Nazi tattoo. Ideally with “before” and “after” pics.
“Right winger pretends to be woke to get D Senate seat, then fucks us all over” is a hell of a scam, and it’s arguably happened at least twice since Obama was in office.
And, yeah, “so called centrist dems fearmonger over candidate to their left” is way more frequent a play. Which is why seeing citations that are more than “we read his reddit history” are worthwhile
How so, exactly?
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB715/2025
I dont see anything in the bill that isn’t “if already-unlawful speech occurs, here are additional steps you need to take.”
Whether or not you feel that discrimination should be protected speech or not, this bill doesn’t seem to much change the status quo.
At least one interoperable PDS has come online, and the network later folks seem entirely aware of the single point of failure that their “firehouse” model suffers from. More importantly, their entire value proposition isnt “were not Twitter”, but rather “if we become evil you should be able to pack up and go elsewhere.”
It’s fashionable on Lemmy to bash Bsky, but the difference really is comparable to the old GNU Hurd project vs Linux. The two most successful FOSS systems ever (Linux and git) took a sucess-first, share-later model while an opinionated actor in charge. I dont mean to argue that this is philosophically better or appropriate for all projects, just that there’s precedent for FOSS starting less open than it eventually becomes.
Maybe drop a platform owned by a modern-day facist who keeps using your tweets to train his attempt and cyberdyne?
Mastodon and BlueSky are right there.
The Senate in 2020 was 50 Republicans, 2 independents who caucus with the Dems, 1 coal baron pretending to be a Democrat, 1 green party scam artist also pretending to be a Democrat, and 46 actual Democrats.
Even if you got past the filibuster the vote would almost certainly be 49-51 against or worse.
You got it in 1.
Trump’s a wannabe facist, so his crony at the FCC corruptly pressured the employer of a comedian he doesn’t like into firing said comedian.
Make note of this, and refer back to it for the next several decades anytime anyone on the right bitches about “cancel culture” or “free speech”.
If Schumer and Jeffries want to endorse whomever they want, they can resign their positions as party leadership.
Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer are doing incalculable damage to Democratic party unity by not enforcing their party’s candidate for NYC mayor.
It doesn’t even matter at this point if Mamdami loses – any call by either “leader” for party unity will be met with “you didn’t endorse Mamdami, why should we endorse your pick” by anyone to their left, forever.
God said no such thing.
The Roman Catholic Popes and cardinals are the ones who said “no divorce.”
When Moses wrote down the law, the rule was was “ok, divorce if you must.”
According to the Gospels, Jesus (God) appropriately said “divorce is bad, and leaving your wife for a younger model is just adultery with extra steps.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+19&version=NIV
(Matthew 19, the aforementioned gospel.)
https://www.insight.org/resources/article-library/individual/what-did-jesus-say-about-divorce
(A Texas pastor opining on the topic. A bit too anti-sex for my taste, but a fair sample of Texas conservative Christendom.)
“President barely passes budget despite his party holding both chambers of Congress” isn’t a major anything.
It is a despicable continuation of the November 2024 disaster, but this isn’t anything worse than what anyone with any wisdom at all saw coming seven months ago.
(It is less-bad than it could have been, in the way that food soaked in piss is less-bad than food smeared with feces. Small victories, though…)
They couldn’t, but “radical feminism” isn’t explicitly transphobic. Hence the four letter acronym.