I remember seeing an article about Alberta and how if the temperature was above a certain °C for too long there was hive collapse (I’d just link the article if my search fu wasn’t failing me, sorry you’re getting the shoddy memory version). The article also implied we were pretty much boned because it looked like climate change, regardless of the cause, was going to push us there in a few years because we’d missed some doomsday cutoff (I love the whooshing noise those make as they go by).
I really dislike the phrase "failure to launch". They're not failures, they're not defective machines. They're people who, at least in part, are choosing not to have sex or be in a relationship. And if they aren't doing it by choice, then it most definitely isn't their responsibility for not "launching" into the roles they are expected to conform to.
Strange but true: Being in a romantic relationship is not a requirement to be a valid or great human being.
This was a phrase mostly used for shaming men who didn’t measure up to some princess’s standards, just shy of ‘incel.’ Maybe the unintelligentsia has decided to use it more broadly now for anyone they want to mock.
I only first heard it 20 years ago, I heard the phrase started in the 80's though. I heard it mostly used by older generations discussing why their children hadn't moved out after high school. Discussions which seemed to always ignore the increased generational cost of living gap and extreme rents at the time, while expecting young adults to be in full-time education. It was not used in a gender-specific way, probably because where I lived there had been changing expectations about women's independence and educations.
I can imagine that for other communities, which still expected that women would get married off young, stop working, and start having children, that there would have been additional expectations for the men they married to be able to provide for them.
I have women in my family who worked in organisations with rules which said that women had to resign when they got married. They were common rules for the time, along with no-divorce marriages. Were I a young woman back then, I would have been very selective about my long-term survival prospects too, faced with the choice of who I needed to rely on. If i were a young man back then, I also would have hated struggling to afford an extra group of people when being at the bottom of the pay/experience ladder.
tl;dr 'Incels' has a vastly different connotation to me and strict gender roles hurt everyone in different ways
Sad. The parents would have known how risky this is, very irresponsible to try get through like that. They may have been fleeing unrest in Honduras, but there are multiple countries before the US they could have tried to seek refuge in. Choosing the US makes them economic migrants at that point.
This is such a frustrating reminder of how stupid people can be. They’re feeding homeless people in central Houston, and the city received reports of violence and threats against library employees. When they decided to designate a new space to feed these people, the fucking assholes chose a location near a police station.
Like that will work. It was largely rejected, so then they made a law against feeding more than five people without getting permission from the property owners.
I don’t understand who you are calling stupid. If the people giving free food to the public received complaints that it was causing reports of violence and threats, wouldn’t be logical for them to move the operation to a police station?
“Let’s take a community with a history of mental health issues and a general distrust of law enforcement and require them to get aid next to the police department.”
Aid program dies and is used to justify cutting budgets of stressed aide programs
Yes. But the fact that the law even exists, that the guy got charged, and that the charges didn’t get dismissed before this point is extremely concerning. There were multiple points of failure before we even got to this point.
Lawmakers never should have created such a shitty law. Police never had to issue tickets. Prosecutors never had to charge him. The judge could have dismissed the charges as utterly ridiculous. But no, all went through and we had to depend a jury to stop this bullshit.
Also, the article has the quote:
The city of Houston said it will continue to “vigorously pursue violations of its ordinance relating to feeding of the homeless,” according to a statement released to news outlets.
So despite all of this, the city of Houston is determined to still be evil little fucks. People tell me Houston is supposed to be progressive, but I’m not seeing it. Houston folks, what the hell?
Not only does the state increasingly criminalize being un-housed, they are increasingly using their power to harass people who have any empathy and try to make a positive impact on the world for no profit motive. There is big money in helping “the homeless” as long as you don’t actually do anything. All facets of government in the U.S. has become a system of graft and corruption. Mr. Smith wouldn’t even get the chance to go to Washington because the DNC is just as complicit as the GOP.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.