One of my personal favorites is to refer them to the response in Arkell v. Pressdram (1971)

Then they should be educated out of those ignorant views, not have their rights restricted. What are you gonna do when some wannabe fascist decides that "basic voting condition" means believing that trans people don't exist, that climate change is a hoax, and that the ultra-wealthy shouldn't pay any taxes actually?

The right to vote shouldn't be restricted in any way. If you have legal restrictions then all it takes is bad actors expanding those categories and sorry, you just failed the critical thinking test because you think that climate change is real and life doesn't begin at conception. Better get ready for your shift at Amazon, serf.

Media literacy and such should just be part of the education everyone gets.

Don't ya just hate it when people make their harmful kink both their entire personality, and a problem for your fundamental rights? It feels weird to say it. But that's basically what this performative Christian schtick is for people like this. They get off in it so now it's all of our problem.

I'm aware of what Solidarity is. I can also just link things, try "Aesthetic Activism."

It makes you and a handful of people feel better that you're using "inoffensive terms" in your "funny meme" and that's it. I'm glad it makes some people feel better. But is that all your "solidarity" amounts to? Changing a word in a meme that it's entirely possible the only people complaining about are being performatively outraged to rep their own "anti-ableism activism" bona fides?

Again I'll reiterate. If you feel that the existence of myself and my children is something so icky that it is only allowed to be talked about in very precise, sanitized, inoffensive terms, how is that meaningfully better than the ableist who just calls us a bunch of r-slurs and leaves? How is your "solidarity" meaningfully different from just saying "Oh yeah, there's something wrong with them. But you can't say it that way?"

It was only supposed to be a little instability Donald! Give us a little dip that we could use to buy up another chunk of the pie. NOT BLOW UP THE ENTIRE FOUNDATION OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE DONALD!

• The Cato Institute, probably?

I think so. I looked up the definition quickly to be sure, and:

shamelessly immoral or debauched. wildly extravagant or wasteful.

I know they wouldn't think so obviously. But a lot of that seems to fit pretty well I think the whole goal of "force whatever woman I can to be my own personal Bang Maid subject to all my whims," kinda qualifies.

Friend, you acting like this is something icky that we shouldn't talk about is stigma. I'm not trying to police your speech. I am trying to get you to think more about why you are policing yours and whether or not it is actually helping.

Without that, your "act of solidarity" is just blind aesthetics and does nothing to actually address the stigma that disabled people like myself and my kids face. Treating us like something unpleasant that is only allowed to be talked about in very specific approved terminology is literally stigmatizing us.

I'm not trying to say you are. Nor am I trying to attack you for wanting to change the words you use to avoid hurting people. Not wanting to hurt people is a good thing. The point is that the words themselves aren't the problem. The actual stigma that fuels ableism is. As I said there was a time when what we now know as the r-slur was the attempt to destigmatize those kinds of mental disabilities. In time it's entirely likely that some or all of today's inclusive language might be seen as too derogatory and something different will take its place.

There will always be bad actors who seek to misuse that desire to not hurt others. Whether that's the person willfully twisting the language that tries to destigmatize into something that hurts, or someone being performatively offended by someone not using the exact correct terminology and implying their own moral superiority.

The point is that at a certain point policing language does nothing to combat ableism. Relabeling a thing on its own tends to do very little to lessen the stigma of that thing.

It appears to be called Takopi from the manga Takopi's Original Sin. I see a book for it and the first things I notice are the tagline "Time travel can't heal all wounds," and that it's listed in the dystopian, horror, and sci-fi lists. Okay yeah I feel like I've got a pretty good grasp of what goes on here.

Being entirely oblivious mostly. I make shonen anime protagonists and lesbian stereotypes look like love gurus by comparison. I am so dense my sexuality actually collapsed into a black hole and that's why I'm asexual.

I missed my wife trying no less than 6 times in one day to get me to come to bed with her. A little while later I noticed her go to the bedroom and thought "Oh sweet, she hasn't gone to sleep yet. Maybe I can get some snuggles." I was then delivered an ultimatum. I either get fucking, or fucking get. I blue-screened so hard I apparently just closed the door and left. I don't actually remember what happened in that moment. That's how hard my brain broke.

Luckily when she eventually was done and came out to tell me it was safe she was laughing her ass off. Apparently my look of utter confusion and bewilderment was something to behold.

I also keep ≪Existential Dread≫ in my closet. How did you know?

You can play this game with almost quite literally every term you could use in this context. Idiot was at one time a term for someone so profoundly mentally impaired that their "mental age" was said to be no more than two years old. What is now known as the "r-slur" was literally introduced as a kinder, more polite alternative to words like idiot, moron, and imbecile because they were seen as too derogatory. Only to be later retired when it began to itself be seen as too derogatory.

It's referred to as the Euphemism Treadmill. People create some euphemism to refer to some unpleasant topic. Eventually that term becomes basically tainted by its association to that topic and itself becomes unpleasant, then a new euphemism gets created.

When it comes to ableism it's often the case that those wishing to be ableist will directly start using the new euphemism in a derogatory manner because they feel the old one has lost its "punch" so to speak. There's a certain aspect of weaponizing the "correct terminology" that is itself the appeal to many of them.

Anyone who listened to Trump and Vance explain them basically. For months they've been straight up lying to their voters that if they put a tariff on China, then China would have to pay to ship their products to the US. How they're going to bring in all this money from China and the rest of the countries that had been supposedly "screwing us" in trade.

Oh yes, tie their ability to stay in the country to them staying in a marriage to someone who actively despises their existence...

Oh wait, that's the "Greatness" a lot of these chuds want to bring back. The days before the country was "ruined" by "No-Fault Divorce" when women couldn't have their own bank accounts and were at the mercy of their husbands/fathers... Right.

Gods I am not awake yet. I was legit confused why he was getting led away if the Lady taught Elementary school. Had to read that like 4 times before it finally clicked that the joke was she's IN Elementary.

Literally from your link they quote him saying.

...but it does not have the right to use US dollars to kill thousands of innocent men, women, and children in Gaza.

But Oh No he didn't say the Magic Word to the press 2 months in when we still have 0 idea what internal discussions were happening. Can't give the guy with probably the longest track record of being on the right side of pretty much every issue any benefit of the doubt. Especially not when he has before been very vocal about Palestinian rights. Couldn't possibly be any good reason he didn't use the Magic Purity Word.

Color me surprised. A video with a hostile interviewer trying to bait him into making statements that paint pro-Palestinian sentiment as pro-Hamas and him predictably navigating the "do you condemn Hamas?" traps.

Of course that outweighs him using the power he has to try to block 20 billion dollars worth of weapons. Heaven forbid he try to be an effective advocate and not demonstrate perfect ideological purity in every interview and talk no matter how it might impede him actually trying to fucking do something about it.

More entirely missing the point. He was literally one of the only voices trying to block weapons to Israel. But no, he didn't stop them entirely on his own or call Biden "Genocide Joe" so that must mean he supports the genocide.

It's really starting to sound like there's literally nothing he could have done that would have been good enough for you.

My Sibling in Satan, how do you think making these demands work? This is an asymmetrical fight. Most of the time you won't get a direct answer because the politicians are playing a different game. By and large they won't commit to anything before the election that might alienate large sections of voters one way or the other.

Electoral politics is about choosing your battlefield for the action to come. In a presidential election it is a mathematical fact that there are only two viable options. Yes, they're both captured to varying degrees by capital. But you can get a sense of who is more likely to accept the things you want.

There was 0 chance of the Republicans stopping what's happening in Gaza for example. Clearly the chance was at least close to 0 with the Democrats but they were more vulnerable on that front and almost certainly they at least wouldn't be trying to send pro-Palestinian activists to a gulag in El Salvador. So given this context which is the more advantageous battlefield you try to advocate on? There is a correct answer here and it's the Democrats.

Is it fair? Absolutely not. Are you running the risk of getting them elected and still not doing what you want? Yep. But a risk they won't listen is objectively better than a guarantee the Republicans won't listen. This is why electoral politics cannot be the only arena where we're fighting, but it's an arena we still have to fight on because it determines the battlefield other action takes place on.