Yes, believing that they will be discriminated against for things that they like and face negative consequences for expressing who they are will discourage many people from doing things, not just girls.
There are plenty of girls who fit into a more masculine standard of behavior and will integrate better into male dominated spaces. However, some girls will want to enjoy feminine coded things without judgement in those spaces and that is valid too.
I have a female friend in STEM who has dealt with an immense amount of misogyny in her field. She’s been the only woman in the room more times than she can keep track of. She has achieved a lot academically, but feels a pressure to conform to a standard of behavior set by men. She loves pink, collects dolls, paints her nails and is unabashedly feminine, and has suffered real social and professional consequences for her gender presentation. It’s literally an act of bravery for her to go to work in a soft fuzzy pink sweater.
I get that the question here is implying that either all little girls are so obsessed with pretty sparkly things that the lack of it would be a detractor, or that it’s reductive to assume that they would and that femininity can take many forms. However, it’s a valid desire to want to do a thing and be accepted for how you are. If a little girl does love pink and glitter and all classically coded feminine things, seeing someone like you in STEM blazing that trail and making a place for you, is just as validating as seeing other minorities in admirable positions. Representation matters.
Trick or treating is alive and well in places where you can walk safely, and houses aren’t too far apart from each other. The problem is too many places in the US don’t fit that description.
Sad that the immediate assumption is friends can’t hold hands 😕
Impressive how many people immediately took up the baton of shitting all over this guy the second they got the order from whatever media bubble they are in.
I’ve been reading and watching what he has to say, and the more people screech he’s a Nazi it sounds more like a very obvious attempt to make people discount him. “What do leftists hate? Nazis! Hey leftists, this guy is a Nazi!”
Is the tattoo a problem? Sure. He should have had it covered ages ago, but his posts and positions aren’t that of a Nazi so that accusation just falls flat as soon as you do even a minute of research.
Still waiting on the evidence of white nationalism and violent rhetoric in his platform. It’s clear the establishment is scared of him and is trying to use the common concerns of leftists to attack him, but it’s just kind of silly to call him a secret cryptofascist white supremacist when there are openly unapologetic ones already in government.
…is still advocating for the mass murder of brown people abroad
Source?
Also, the military vets in my life are some of the most disillusioned people with the establishment, because they’ve seen the effects of imperialist bullshit up close.
He said it was gotten in 2007 and has since gotten it covered up. Until I see evidence of him saying actual Nazi things like advocating for violence, holocaust denialism, admiration of authoritarianism/dictators, persecution of minorities or ethnicities, and other supremacist nationalist rhetoric I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
His website has some good policy positions.
He wants election finance reform, believes in environmental protections, medicare for all, protecting small businesses and is anti-billionaire. Seems like the right kind of anti-establishment populist and it’s refreshing to see someone so unapologetically progressive.
His website has some good policy positions.
He wants election finance reform, believes in environmental protections, medicare for all, protecting small businesses and is anti-billionaire. Seems like the right kind of anti-establishment populist and it’s refreshing to see someone so unapologetically progressive.
After seeing the media blitz about the tattoo I decided to check out his website
https://www.grahamforsenate.com/platform
while my platform spans many issues, I view most of my job as a US Senator as to do two things: one, to ban billionaires buying elections; two, to dismantle the “billionaire economy”, in favor of an economy that works for the American worker, for small business, for the vast majority of Americans. I will be a Senator for all those who can’t buy Senators.
Sounds like a legit progressive to me, anti-establishment and populist in the good way. I like his platform and I hope all of this attention does him more good than harm. Hard to be bothered by decades old tattoos when there are congresspeople with actual swastikas in their office.
So he’s talked about gassing people in private chats? Has he said he loves Hitler?
Is there evidence of him using race or ethnicity as a bogeyman “other” to persecute and exile people?
Has he advocated for violence or extreme “solutions” to perceived problems in the country?
Frankly, nothing on his platform comes close to what is already happening in plain sight. Platner has stated he’s anti-billionaire and that’s clear enough a reason why all of this muck is getting raked. If you’re going to do their work for them, I hope you’re at least getting paid for it.
Very interested in this guy now that the muck raking has started. Let’s see why all of this nazi stuff is suddenly getting kicked up.
https://www.grahamforsenate.com/platform
I view most of my job as a US Senator as to do two things: one, to ban billionaires buying elections; two, to dismantle the “billionaire economy”, in favor of an economy that works for the American worker, for small business, for the vast majority of Americans
Ah yup that would do it.
Yeah absolutely. A few plant IDs I’ve tried have said very confidently that a plant is a specific thing, but then after reading descriptions and checking the scientific name it’s very clearly not that. It does generally give a good place to start though. So maybe it’s not black cohosh but it leads me to find out it’s bugbane, for instance.
I have eaten some things I’ve foraged, but only things I’ve checked and double checked don’t have any dangerous lookalikes. Thankfully it’s hard to go wrong with a blackberry vine.
Plant ID has its own drawbacks, now I’m actually aware of the major invasive species in my region and I see them everywhere now.
At least I have some cute wild carrots.
It apparently doesn’t have to be as realistic as hallucinating or dreaming to be exceptional though. There are tests for aphantasia that involve picturing a loved one, their face, then some common piece of clothing they wear and if you can see them clearly in your mind and describe them as if they were in front of you that is something reasonably out of the ordinary. You might be “hyperphantasic” too
The downside is that when I get a song stuck in my head, it’s really in there.
I have a good imagination. After meeting people with aphantasia it seems I have an exceptional ability to call to mind sights, smells, sensations, sounds, and simulate the interactions they would have entirely in my mind. I can imagine a different set of curtains on the wall and tell you if it would clash with your paint, and I can taste a spoonful of a soup and go through a mental library of tastes and combine it with more salt, onion, wine etc and make a suggestion based on what “tasted” the best. I thought everyone could do it but some people don’t have a “mind’s eye” at all. Some people only can see in their imaginations, not smell or taste or hear etc.
I don’t have much time to respond so I’m going to just hit one bullet for now:
Are you going to try to argue that Khan and Gul Dukat weren’t given nuance and development? Some of the things that made them such compelling antagonists is that we were given insight into their motives and backgrounds and perspectives. Khan absolutely was nuanced and the persecution and illegality of genetically enhanced humans was a great stepping off point for him. Just about every antagonist that pops up in Star Trek gets some kind of explanation why they are doing the things they are doing, and the crew takes a moment to acknowledge their inherent worth as living beings and, if they’re sentient, discuss possibilities for negotiations or nonviolence. I haven’t forgotten that Klingons, Ferengi, Borg, Cardassians and many others start off as villains, but we are given many opportunities for them to be “humanized” through characters like Worf, Quark, Hugh/Seven, Garak and others. There are no “good” or “bad” aliens in Star Trek.
So keeping that in mind, how did things go with the Ba’Ul? How did they handle Control? What nuance was Lorca given? In Discovery, your first impression of a bad guy being bad is always correct.
I wear Gwamm on my main but I have a glowy Sylvari with radiant pieces who has “Super Shiny”.