Why would we come together over Russia? Russia has probably helped the Republican party accomplish a lot of their aims. They have no reason to oppose that.

I think part of it is how the word “problematic” is used in the first place. Better to name the actual problem (“the artist said something racist”, “the artist raped someone”) than to use a term so broad you could virtually always apply it (or at least make an argument for doing so) to the subject in question.

So you think such a tape would persuade enough Republican senators to flip, but would not convince a majority of the current House to vote to impeach in the first place?

Wait, would “gagging on the execution” indicate like or dislike?

I’m sure there’s mountains of amazing art made by people who aren’t rapists or sexual harassers.

I doubt there’s much art at all that’s produced by people who aren’t problematic.

True. And in general the odds of any given generation being the one are extremely low. Just want to emphasize that someone will be right. A lot of people seem to act like humans (or life) will go on forever.

Even in the best-case November, we still won’t have a Senate willing to convict.

Even with both houses Trump will still be president, unless the Dems get a supermajority in the Senate. I’m not sure when the earliest date is when that would would be possible, let alone probable.

To be fair, we know for sure there that there will be a last generation. Presumably some of the second-to-last generation will make the same prediction and be right.

Yeah, that’s true. My understanding that “stealth” usually refers to something less frequently achieved.

It seems like sexual orientation (particularly mono) is in a weird spot here. My experience is that a lot of people who identify as “heterosexual” and “homosexual” mean that they are exclusively attracted to people with a certain range of primary + secondary sex characteristics (albeit often worded as to not sound so…

What was the conventional wisdom for those (the majority?) unable to live stealth?

Thanks. I think I understand. So it’s still talking about something internal. You couldn’t say that someone is gender nonconforming based purely on their external performance (or lack thereof) of gender roles.

“gender-nonconforming”

Is there a specialized meaning for this term? On face value, it seems like it would encompass a huge number of cis people, and therefore be an odd category to lump in with “trans” and “non-binary”.

I’m not very optimistic about the benefits of “respecting” where meats come from. Unless that somehow translates to producers being willing to sacrifice profit for humanitarian reasons (or the public demanding stricter laws and regulations), only so much can change.

It will always be more expensive to care about what…

Yeah, that makes sense, and I get that. Just in the article itself it seemed strange to juxtapose that specific objection with the comment about how much of the animal is used.

I think part of the problem is that (unless I’m mistaken) if you try someone as a juvenile, you *have* to free them once they reach adulthood, no matter how soon that is or how much of a danger they still are to others.

What? The victim is alive.

I can’t tell from this article or the links what kind of mental institution she ended up being sentenced to - just what the prosecution and defense argued. Has this not been decided yet?

One issue people who don’t eat pork have with those who do eat it is how smart pigs are [...] but a good thing about pig is that there’s very minimal waste; basically everything is used for food.