My first thought was “wait until they hear about Shakespeare”. Literally every role filled by men, sometimes with the script explicitly calling for a man to play a female in full attire.

I’d also hate to see what policies they’ll enact for their chorale program when performing historical hymns, where soprano parts specifically called for a male eunuch (castrato) to sing since females were not allowed to attend church services including choirs.

In my younger years I would have been absolutely vilified by these people. I’m probably vilified now, but I would’ve been then too. In all seriousness though, I cannot believe how far backwards we’ve gone in all this. I recognize that these thoughts and feelings have existed since before I was a kid but at least back then people seemed to have the decency to mind their own.

But to attack theatre of all things with this gender bullshit is attacking theatre itself. Crossdressing in theatre has existed for as long as theatre has existed. Cross-singing has existed for as long as singing has existed. If they’re not teaching that stuff in their performing arts programs, they are denying young adults a quality education of the performing arts.

I originally had typed out a long-winded reply that I realized was ultimately counterproductive. In all likelihood we should be allies.

So let me start by congratulating you on your new position! I hope that you can continue to pump out that much energy on the job and still have at least that much energy to take home to friends and family.

That said, IMO the fight against the modern work week isn’t about people being tired. While I do think most people would be tired and lack energy for self, family, and friends after doing the work you do, that’s largely irrelevant. The real problem with the modern work week is that it’s simply not necessary any more.

I prefer making the comparison to peasants rather than slaves, as slaves obviously had/have it much worse than the average modern worker. Back in the days of peasantry people worked because they needed the fruit of their labor to survive. Regardless of how many hours it took or how tired they were, they directly relied on the crop they farmed and the clothes they made to survive. That is no longer the case.

In the modern age we produce more than we need to survive on a global scale. There is more than enough for everyone as is and there has been for some time. So why is it still expected that we work the same as we have for years and years? In the age where much of the work is automated and automation increasing rapidly, why is it still inherently expected that humans work just as much, or even remotely close to as much, as we have in the past? To us, the modern work week is essentially arbitrary. We work until “the boss” says we’ve worked enough to earn our allowance and they say we should be thankful for as much as we’re given. We no longer receive or rely on the fruit of our labor in order to survive, “the boss” relies on the fruit of our labor in order to afford their next luxury.

Don’t get me wrong, we live in an age of relative comfort. Most of us have plenty to survive and some creature comforts to spare. But if you are apart of “the 98%”, which in all likelihood you are, you are not receiving anything even remotely close to what you actually produce.

So, looking past any claims of being tired after 40 hours/week, or how studies have shown that in many cases the modern work week can literally be counterproductive, I ask you why we are expected to work 40 hours/week if it’s simply not necessary, aside from “the boss” essentially arbitrarily declaring that it is necessary? And really the fight for a shortened work week and the fight for increased minimum wage are the same fight. It’s all based on the fact that we as workers are receiving less and less for our work as time goes by.

That’s what the fight is really about, and why -provided you’re not a billionaire (which you’re very likely not)- we are allies. I may disagree with you on many things, myself and many others may not have as much energy as you, we may not have similar interests or hobbies, but truly none of that matters at all since we are both the modern day equivalent to peasants, except neither of us receives the full fruit of our labor. And for that I call you friend.

So with that, I wish you the greatest success in life friend. And whether or not you join the fight, or even agree with it, may you receive your true worth.

How optimistic to think you’d make it to trial for your theft.

What is the punishment for disclosing the confidential material that he is reviewing? And what punishment would a “normal” person face? If the answers are anything like the punishment Trump faced for violating a court-mandated gag order, I suspect he will talk about these confidential documents, and punishment will consist of a harsh tone and finger wagging. And don’t be fooled, to the wealthy (or to those receiving large sums in political donations), a monetary fine measured in thousands of dollars is just that: a harsh tone and finger wag.

IDGAF if he’s the former president. IDGAF if it were Biden, Clinton, or the most liberal/Democratic person in existence. If they break the law, if they break court orders, punish them equally.

This is infuriating. Let me make sure I’ve got this right:

So, our military personnel “volunteer” to serve, and in doing so are forced to reside at whatever military base in whichever State/country that the higher ups decide. Then the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which allowed for existing abortion bans to go into effect in various states as well as paved the way for other abortion bans to be put into effect. Our military personnel are also bound by the laws of wherever they are stationed. To help alleviate the concerns of our military personnel, President Biden issued a travel reimbursement policy so that our volunteer based military personnel wouldn’t have to pay to travel somewhere that they more agree with the laws of, to have a medical procedure performed that is outlawed where they have been forced to reside. Then this chucklefuck Tuberville decides to block any and all military promotions because he essentially thinks that the most regressive state laws should apply to the entire volunteer based military. And then he complains that the military is facing personnel issues? Excuse me but what the fuck? Am I missing something?

I don’t think anyone is even forcing states to allow abortions for military personnel, just trying to provide travel reimbursement so that personnel can go to a state that hasn’t banned abortions without having to pay the travel costs themselves. Right? Why wouldn’t we want that policy? Military personnel don’t get to choose where they’re stationed (they do sometimes get some say but they don’t make the final decision) so why not reimburse them if they’re forced to travel for medical reasons?

If he thinks the military is facing personnel issues now, and at least partially because he’s interfering, has he even considered the ramifications of taking even more rights away from people that volunteer to serve? I mean, ffs they already give up many of their rights as is. And abortion bans have already proven to be an extremely unpopular policy, with citizens in several Republican states already voting against said bans and in fairly large numbers with large margins to boot.

I legitimately feel like I must be missing something. Can this guy really be this stupid? Or does he actually despise the American people? Is there some pro-life lobbying group bribing donating to him for him to do this?

Great job on stereotyping an entire population of peoples as liars. 👍

And downplaying the loss of innocent lives to boot.

It is “possible” that some were bombed? I guess as long as only some innocent people were bombed everything is ok. After all “many many” were safely uprooted from their homes and evacuated south. Hooray…

I doubt this will sink in but I have to try. There have definitely been innocent lives lost from both sides of this conflict and every one of them is a tragedy. I’m not advocating for either side here because everyone involved in the loss of innocent lives sucks. I don’t have a magical solution either so don’t bother asking. Innocent people have already, and will continue to die in this conflict. Don’t try to make it seem like innocent casualties aren’t a big deal.

Preface: I do not know enough of this subject or conflict to speak authoritatively.

If they were told to leave their homes and take a certain path to avoid being bombed, trusted that advice but were bombed on the “safe” path anyway by the very people who told them they would be safe if they took said path, why should they continue to trust whoever told them that?

Furthermore, if there were bombs dropping on and/or around you no matter what you did or who you listened to, simply for existing in the wrong place and at no fault of your own, wouldn’t you rather at least be in the “comfort” of your own home?

I had to check. They actually said this. I’ve never played Warhammer (I have been interested, just haven’t gotten around to it) and I don’t know these devs at all, but contradicting themselves with just seven words in the same sentence is actually kind of impressive.

I especially love the part where they say that X/Twitter not hiring after their layoffs has left many people wondering what those employees were doing in the first place. As someone who has never been very “into” Twitter, even I can see that the site has gone way downhill since Musk and his layoffs. I don’t have to wonder what the laid off employees were doing because I know by a quick glance that whatever they were doing, they were doing it better than it’s being done now.

According to the article, I think a more appropriate analogy would be claiming “I’m going to sell four apples!”, followed by actually selling three apples. Then claiming you spent a fortune to get out of an existing contract saying you would rent an apple-basket for x years, as well as having to pay the apples you sold because you sold them earlier than you told them you would. And then buying two apples from the person selling apples next-door that picks their apples from the same tree you picked yours from.

At the end of the day you’ve only lowered your apple count by one while you simultaneously:

• Manufactured a tax write-off for the expenses you incurred by prematurely selling three apples

• Manufactured a tax write-off for the expenses you incurred by prematurely terminating the agreement to rent an apple-basket

• Manufactured a tax write-off for the expenses you incurred by buying two apples from a rival apple merchant

• Sewed seeds of doubt among all fruits, vegetables, and other produce regarding their chances of finding a merchant

• Got investors to at least temporarily value your business higher because they thought you had five too many apples and were excited at the prospect of you selling four of them

Keep in mind that in this analogy you had teams of experts that calculated all of this for you well in advance of you even making an announcement, and that the rival apple merchant also took very similar, if not identical steps.

Edit: Oh, and don’t forget that selling apples isn’t actually the business you and your rival apple merchant are in. You’re both actually in the juice business and apples are just a means to an end for you.