It’s why us Brits complain about 25°C (77°Freedom Units) weather. Being next to the ocean and having so much rain makes it unpleasant, and 35°C (95°F) is just hellish

I get what a lot of you guys are saying about Starmer and the Labour government not being as left wing as Corbyn. I would also like someone who would use this majority to implement some really hardcore leftist policies.

But please can we just take a step back and look at what he wants to do:

• Massive amounts of NHS funding

• Nationalised green energy

• Tax private schools

• Allow regulators to hit company executives with criminal charges

• Nationalise the railways

• Increase the minimum wage to a living wage

• Free school meals

I don’t know about you, but that seems at the very least, left of center. Sure, he’s not making drastic sweeping changes right off the bat. But this country needs an era of stability, whilst we make small but consistent steps in the right direction, and that’s what Starmer will give us

Raising the tax threshold to £20,000 will absolutely help the poorest in society, especially short term which many currently need help with.

You are correct with the rest of your comment though, which is exactly why I said it was unfunded, and that simultaneously cutting taxes on the rich is a ludicrous idea.

My point is that there are other reasons why people would support Reform than just being frothing at the mouth racists

To be fair, a lot of their policies directly help the working class. Like raising the tax threshold to £20,000. They couldn’t fund any of it, as they’re simultaneously promising to cut taxes on the most wealthy. But if you listen to a lot of what Farage says, it’s the same as every other party, but he’s also promising radical change and radical solutions.

As misinformed, racist, and bigoted as they are, they’re playing hard to the poorest in our society and present as the most pro working class party.

Just to make it clear, they’re a disgusting party, and I’m not even slightly suggesting anyone should ever vote for them. Just to actually acknowledge your opponent’s strengths so we can better combat them before the next election

Edit: Made it clearer what the £20,000 policy was

The policies to start nationalising a bunch of public services, abolishing no fault evictions, and the bolstered housing targets are all pretty solid. The additional union laws to help protect workers rights is amazing too.

I agree with your sentiment, none of the much needed structural change is going to occur. But he’s a damn lot better than the Tories and a reason to feel somewhat optimistic.

I’m actually downright ecstatic at the idea of there being a pro-EU LibDem opposition to a Labour party that largely has pro-EU members (even if they need to tow the party line). A boring “left” party being opposed by an also boring “left” opposition sounds damn right cheery after the last 14 years. Hopefully it’ll at least shift the conversation away from deporting people to Rwanda and into more sane territory

They’re wishing for them to have very large weiners. It’s a compliment I think

The people who are more likely to retain a PC and not just use a phone, are more likely to be tech literate power users. This selects against casual windows users, and selects for hardcore Linux users

Thank you for the response.

The problem is that the accommodation and special treatment is in part separating these women from men and perceived masculinity. We would have to start chopping up support groups into trans-inclusive and trans-exclusive. And I don’t think sending them to a male/trans therapist is going to be very helpful.

Transphobic (I’m not sure of a better word) trauma victims would want some sort of system in place to ensure these extremely unlikely things don’t occur. Trauma can really fuck with your rational thinking like that. I still can’t really cope in certain places and environments.

Once again, I’m aware this is an extreme edge case, and basically never going to happen irl

Only because everyone’s on edge, give it a few years and they’ll need “anonymised” data collection to “help improve their service”

I 100% agree with your post. The issues she raises are nonexistent or extremely rare. In my personal life I believe and practice “trans-women are women” as for all intents and purposes it’s true.

I am however concerned that I don’t really have a response to anyone who doesn’t believe that, particularly women with some sort of past trauma that gives them an instinctual fear response. It feels insensitive to tell them to get over it or go to therapy. Particularly if they’ve been exposed to one of the extremely rare examples Rowling has presented. But I think going to therapy is probably what needs to happen.

My other conflicting thought is that therapy or condemnation it is what we would say to people being racist, but there seems to be a societal agreement that we need women only spaces. And we don’t say “get over it” in regards to men trying to enter a women’s shelter, we offer an amount of sympathy and understanding to the women and allow them that space. Which means there is some amount of gender discrimination is desired/needed. This also indicates there there should be a line or set of fuzzy criteria that determines if we treat trans-women as women or not. But this obviously also feels wrong, and I hate it.

Sorry if this was insensitive, I mostly just want to gather thoughts as I’m not confident in my thinking. I don’t think these issues deserve the amount of attention transphobes are giving them, but we’re here now, so I want to try and figure out a solution or response to more “reasonable” transphobes that I could potentially change the minds of

Totally, the problem is he should be in a home, and a fresh strapping young lad/lass under the age of 70 (lmao) should be doing these debates instead.

Trump needs to be defeated at all costs, I’m just massively disappointed that this is the guy the democrats chose

Yeah, it’s a great first few steps. Really hoping LibDem becomes the official opposition and it’s just two Left™ parties driving each other leftward.

Current Labour concerns me with how it’s moved rightwards, but Daddy Starmer has my vote regardless

Thank you my dude 🙏

Totally, the other thing both of your examples did well is actually integrate the “Woke™” elements into their world in a natural and believable way. None of it unearthed established canon or went out of its way to score rainbow capitalist diversity points

I feel like a lot of “woke” shows are not great, but they get a cult of defenders and haters boosting it’s popularity because of some perceived culture war. When it’s really just execs trying to make their milk toast milquetoast slop shamelessly appeal to a wider audience.

No one complains about Spiderverse (after it came out) because it was good

I’m not sure where you’re going with that? I would argue that yes, it is. As it’s sexual material of a child, with that child’s face on it, explicitly made for the purpose of defaming her. So I would say it sexually abused a child.

But you could also be taking the stance of “AI trains on adult porn, and is mearly recreating child porn. No child was actually harmed during the process.” Which as I’ve said above, I disagree with, especially in this particular circumstance.

Apologies if it’s just my reading comprehension being shit

The original 20 minute video in the article makes it clear he’s talking about job roles, and mentions writers a few times (admittedly not close enough to draw an 100% certain link). I don’t think it’s enough to discredit this just based on the assumption that he’s talking about actors or that there isn’t enough context. Obviously it’s vague enough that we can’t draw any solid conclusions, so I agree with you there.

The main reason I think this is bullshit is that the guy’s testimony isn’t credible for two main reasons:

• The guy was recently passed up for promotion, and blames it on being white and male
• The interviewer is posing as a romantically interested date and asking plenty of leading questions, the guy is at least partially telling her what she wants to hear

These two points, regardless of how true his story is, give him an ulterior motive for embellishing the story and exaggerating facts, which ultimately means we can’t trust this.

I’d like to see a full investigation, as with any accusation of discrimination. But we all know that when nothing turns up, it wouldn’t shut the right wingers up

only 2tb? that’s the size of my cache drives

Being charitable, he’s saying that he’s going to massively help cooperations, and that any exec should do the morally bankrupt thing and vote for him because he (thinks) that he’ll make line go up much more than Biden.

Although the more I think about it, it’s hard not to see it as a not so subtle call for ideological purity. It’s certainly going to rally some people

You literally used the example of a doctor to disagree with someone saying it’s clinical, I just thought it was funny so made a joke.

And why so serious? Reply to the other person who was actually making a serious point if you want that