#It's not unfair to claim that the US won that one

[robertreich]

It’s Time to Roast Starbucks For Union Busting

Starbucks should be getting publicly roasted for union busting and refusing to even negotiate with unionized workers.

You see, if there’s one thing I love more than coffee, it’s unions. Because unions perk up pay.

And if there’s one thing I hate more than corporations who try to bust unions, it’s having to make my own coffee every morning.

I may be known for a lot of things, but making a good cup of coffee isn’t one of them.

I was thrilled to hear about workers in Starbucks’ stores across the country exercising their right to unionize.

A cup of solidarity brewed by a unionized barista? What could be better than that?

Definitely not me being my own barista.

Starbucks is a multibillion dollar company. Its new CEO will start with a pay package estimated to be worth over $28 million dollars. That’s roughly 800x the pay of the workers who actually brew and serve the coffee the business is built on — and who barely earn a living wage.                                            

That’s why those workers have begun to unionize.

Since December 2021, Starbucks Workers United has won union elections in more than 300 Starbucks stores, covering more than 8,000 workers and counting.

And most of the union campaigns in individual stores won by overwhelming margins, gaining more than 70% of the total votes — and in parts of the country where private sector unions rarely win.

The Starbucks union campaign has inspired young workers across the country and breathed life into a U.S. labor movement that has been stagnant for decades.

It’s been so successful that Starbucks briefly brought its former CEO, billionaire Howard Schultz, out of retirement to bust the union, and still refuses to even sit down at the bargaining table.

That’s why I’ve been boycotting Starbucks.

As part of its campaign to tamp down further unionization, Starbucks corporate has fired scores of pro-union workers, closed stores that have unionized, threatened to withhold wage and benefit improvements from stores considering unionizing, and packed stores with outside managers to undermine organizing efforts.

The National Labor Relations Board, which oversees all union elections in the U.S., has issued more than 93 complaints covering 328 unfair labor practice charges against Starbucks — and ordered reinstatement of at least 23 fired workers so far.

Yet Starbucks is unwilling to change its anti-union ways — even though Schultz was grilled in front of Congress 

Starbucks claims to be a “progressive” company.

But based on the way it’s broken labor law and put unionized workers in the percolator, that couldn’t be further from the truth.

Now is an opportunity for all of us to make our voices heard and to tell Starbucks to stop UNION BUSTING and bargain in good faith with Starbucks Workers United.

And it’s time for Joe Biden, who calls himself the “most pro-union president in American history,” to send a powerful message: we won’t tolerate union-busting by Starbucks or any other corporation — including Elon Musk’s Tesla and Jeff Bezos’s Amazon.

Otherwise, my boycott will continue — and perhaps you’ll consider joining me.  

If we want to brew a future where workers have power and dignity, then we need to show solidarity with unions…

And stand up to corporate bullying.

#youtube #unions #corporations #politics #business #union busting #Gen Z #video #videos #starbucks #coffee #Joe Biden

[hedgehogsaretheultimatelifeform]

Lessons Learned

Ghost/Gaz/F!Reader

After Gaz cheated to win a bet over Ghost, Ghost is looking to get his own back, and he’s wondering if you’d be willing to help him.

also known as

Ghost uses you to punish Gaz by making him hold your hands down as Ghost tonguefucks you until you cry (consensually, ofc).

NSFW below the cut, minors get out now.

You were the only one to see how Ghost’s eyes darkened when Gaz claimed victory in the bet last weekend. You were the only one watching as Ghost sunk back into his seat, staring at the beer left in his glass as he pieced together how Gaz had played a little loose with the rules in order to win the pile of cash in the middle of the table. He was pissed, that anyone would play unfair, even when Gaz remedied the situation by using his winnings to supply the next round.

So, when Ghost caught your arm the next time you stopped by his office, pulling you close and cupping your face in his hands, whispering as he asked if you’d noticed anything about Gaz over the last couple of days, you knew exactly what he was on about.

“The bet, last Friday?” You guessed, trying to act like you didn’t.

“Yes, the bet. What about it?”

“That he won?”

“By breaking the rules.”

“Aww, Si, you about to start complaining how it’s not fair?” You mirrored how he was holding your face, pressing your thumb to his lips through the mask. “Like you wouldn’t have done the same if you thought of it first.”

“Course I would. Still, Gaz cheated. Cheated me, cheated you. I think he should answer for that.”

“And how do you intend to make him answer for it?”

“With you.” Ghost’s hand squeezed on your chin. “If you’ll help me.”

“Help you? How?”

Ghost chuckled lightly. “Just, come back here this afternoon, without anything on under those jeans,” he ran his thumb over your lips, “and, I’ll take care of the rest.”

“Take care, how?”

“Lie you out on this desk, use my tongue on you till you cry. Make Gaz watch.”

His words sent heat flooding through your body. The idea of Ghost treating you right in the best way possible, while making Gaz sit and watch, getting frustrated and whiny as Ghost kept control of both of you… “You’d better do that. And more”

“Don’t I always?” He tugged your head down towards his, resting your foreheads together, a compromise you’d made around how hard it was to kiss him when he was in his mask. “Is that a yes?”

“It’s a yes.” You nodded, as Ghost let go of you. “I’ll see you after lunch?”

“Me and Gaz, after lunch.” He nodded, as you left his office.

The time could not go past fast enough. Back in your own office, you sat, staring at the clock watching the seconds tick by until lunch had come and gone, and you were beginning to wonder how long you should wait before hurrying up the corridor to Ghost’s office, sans underwear. How long could you get away with, before Ghost would come and find you? He’d probably berate you for keeping him and Gaz waiting, and turn today into a punishment for you as much as Gaz. Ghost didn’t ask for much in your relationship, but he did prefer for his rules to be kept.

At half two, you’d reflected enough to decide that making Ghost come look for you wasn’t the best idea (for today, at least), and you left your office to hurry over to Ghost’s, not even bothering to knock as you walked in.

Ghost looked up and chuckled. “Took you long enough. Kept Gaz here waiting.” 

He nodded to where Gaz was sat on the sofa, arms crossed and a face made like he was sulking.

“This is so not fucking necessary, Si. Can’t you just yell at me or something?”

“You don’t learn when I do that, so we’re trying something different.” Ghost pulled his mask off, rubbing a hand through his brown hair, making it stick up in short spikes. He caught your eye as you giggled at that, and beckoned you close. “On the desk, love.” 

He helped you up to lie down on the already cleared surface, humming lightly as he did the cursory work to expose what he needed of your body, undoing the buttons on your shirt and pulling your trousers down around your ankles. Without anything to do, you tilted your head back, staring at Gaz, who was still sat on the sofa, making a point of not looking at either of you.

Simon saw where you were looking, and pressed his hand on your thigh, the warmth sinking into your skin as you relaxed under his touch. “Don’t worry, love. Gaz is waiting until he’s told.” 

You nodded as Ghost spread your legs wide and knelt between them, grabbing your ass as he exhaled directly onto your cunt. You gasped and squirmed, stuttering out his name, because he fucking knew how sensitive you got when he did that. Ghost responded by grabbing you tighter before pushing his tongue against your pussy. Your hands flew to his hair, grabbing hold of the short strands and pulling at it, desperately trying to keep him quiet between your thighs, but you weren’t strong enough to stop him from pulling his head back and uttering a single word. 

“Kyle.” 

Gaz shot up and raced to the other side of the desk, his eyes immediately finding yours, already filled with desperate frustration, as he leaned over and reached down your body. You thought he was reaching down to help Ghost toy with you, to roll his fingers over your clit in a way no one by he could, but instead he grabbed your hands, pried your fingers from Ghost’s hair, and pulled them up over your head, holding them still by his sides, effectively pinning you in place.

“Gaz?” The startled gasp left your lips as you instinctively kicked at Ghost’s back.

Ghost gently rubbed his hands up your thighs to soothe you, showing he was still paying attention to you as he spoke to Gaz. “Remember, Kyle. You hold ‘em down, you don’t touch ‘em anywhere else, you don’t touch me, you don’t touch yourself. You keep your eyes on their face, watch exactly what I’m doing to them, until I say so. Understand?”

“Yes, sir.” Gaz gasps, pressing his hips against the edge of the desk, tightening his grip as you try to pull your hands free.

“Good.” Ghost’s voice softened when he addressed you. “Love?”

“Yeah?” you dragged your eyes from Gaz’s to look down at Ghost.

“Colour?”

“Green.” You responded.

“Good.”

With that, Ghost was done talking. He dragged one of his hands up your thigh to your core, dipping his fingers into the mix of your wet pussy and his saliva, pushing your lips wide and shoving his tongue into you. The sudden movement made you drop your head back to the desk, meeting Gaz’s eyes again as a breath choked its way out of your mouth, lips parted as Ghost ate you out sinfully. You couldn’t feel anything by Ghost’s grip on your thighs, his tongue on your pussy, and Gaz’s grip on your hands, everything else disappearing in the pleasure and the security they provided as they held you down over this desk.

When you focused on Gaz’s face, you could see his eyes flitting about your body and how it was moving, straining simultaneously away and into Ghost’s mouth. Gaz’s lips were moving, he was saying something, muttering about how good you looked with Ghost servicing you, not that you could be sure. You couldn’t hear anything beyond how messy and wet your pussy was.

Ghost was taking you apart, skilfully dissolving your resolve in mere seconds, hooking his tongue each time he dragged it out of you, his thumb pressing down on your clit, certainly delivering on what you’d been shivering with anticipation for the whole day. He was earning every moan that fell from your lips as you shook in his and Kyle’s grip, begging to cum while you still could form coherent speech, because you wouldn’t by the time Ghost was done with you.

Gaz wanted so badly to drag his gaze away from your face, from your body, to look anywhere else, because otherwise he was going to cum inside his boxers, and he didn’t even want to think about what Ghost would have to say about that. It wasn’t like he’d told Gaz he couldn’t cum until Ghost said, but he’d have a mocking mouthful for Kyle in this scenario. Something about him being so eager to spread his cum around, he couldn’t even wait to see good pussy before he did it. How was Ghost supposed to keep picking up after Kyle, because if Kyle wasn’t hard when there was needy pussy waiting, then Ghost would have to fuck it instead, wouldn’t he?

Gaz grit his teeth, jutting his erection against the edge of the desk, the spike of pain staving off the inevitable just enough for him to tighten his grip on your hands as you cried out, back arching off the desk as Ghost got you to cum. Ghost hushed you gently, massaging your thighs as you shook against the wood, before sitting back on his heels and looking up at Gaz.

“Kyle.”

Gaz dragged his gaze down your body, then up to look at Ghost. “Yes?”

“You cum yet?”

“No.”

Ghost kept looking at him, wordlessly, his lips and chin shining in the bright light, as he waited for Gaz to correct himself.

“No, sir.” 

“Do you want to?” Ghost kept his eyes on Gaz, but started rubbing his fingers around the edge of your sticky pussy, making you whine underneath their staring match.

“Yes, I do, sir.”

“Can you wait for this one to have one more?” Ghost pushed the tips of his fingers into you, making you squirm, one of your wrists sliding until Gaz caught it again. “Promised I’d make them cry, is all.”

“You…” bastard, Kyle wanted to say, but then he wouldn’t cum at all. “You never promise me that.”

“You’ve never asked for it. Would you like it?”

“I… maybe another time?”

“Another time it is. Keep ‘em still, yeah?”

“Yes, sir.” Gaz swallowed, dropping his head back down to stare at you, mumbling your name as you twitched, still sensitive as Ghost’s tongue dipped back inside you. “You wanna cry, huh?”

You nodded, staring up at Gaz as he leant down closer to you, concealing the words he whispered.

“That’s how he got you to agree to this? I could’ve made you cry, you know.”

You nodded, eyes beginning to glaze over as Ghost moved his lips up, pulling your clit between his teeth.

“So, why are we here?” Gaz hovered just above your face, slowly blurring out of focus as tears gathered in the corner of your eyes, thighs twitching as Ghost dragged you to the edge again, the pads of his fingers dragging over the edge of your wet hole.

“You… cheated…” You huffed out, between stuttering breaths as the knot pulled tight in your gut again.

Gaz sighed, air brushing over your cheeks. “I know. I’m sorry.”

“Not… me, you should… apologise to.” You felt the tears run down your cheeks as you twisted, trying to pull back from Ghost. “Too… too much…”

Ghost hummed, gently rubbed your thigh and slowed his fingers, settling them into a rhythm as Gaz’s lips ghosted over your cheeks, pressing against your skin until you shook, and came again.

“There we go… Good pet.” Ghost eased back, gently pulling you up from the desk into his arms, beckoning Kyle to follow as he crossed the room to the sofa. He sank back into the cushions, curling you on one side, and spreading his lap open for Gaz to sit on.

“You too, Gaz. So good for me.”

Gaz huffed, shoving his hands against Ghost’s shoulders. “Can I cum? Sir?”

“We’re done now, Kyle. Just us now, just Simon, Kyle, and this one, yeah?”

You wiped your eyes to watch as Simon cupped the back of Kyle’s neck, pressing their foreheads together, sighs leaving their mouths as they rested for a moment, before kissing.

“You want to cum, yeah?”

Gaz nodded, pushing his hips forward. “Yeah. So bad.”

“Go on, then. Take care of yourself.”

“Lazy bastard.” Gaz groaned out, as he undid his jeans and pulled his cock out, hard and leaking before he wrapped his hand around it and stroked himself.

“I’ve only got two hands.” Ghost pointed out. One was on your shoulder, keeping you pulled close to his side, and the other was on the back of Gaz’s head, holding him steady as Gaz groaned, dragging himself towards the finish line. “That’s it, go on, cum for me, yeah?”

“Fucking want to, Christ, Simon…” Gaz groaned. “Fuck…”

“Yeah…” Ghost was rubbing his thumb over Gaz’s skin, stopping when you placed your hand over his on the back of Gaz’s neck. “Pet?”

“Hush.” You said to him as you dragged yourself up to your knees, cuddling up to Gaz’s side, pressing your lips against his ears, whispering over and over how he should cum for you, cum for you, cum for us, as Gaz shivered under your touch, and emptied himself over Ghost’s shirt.

“Fuck,” was all Gaz said as Ghost tangled the two of you together on his lap, trapping Gaz as he tried to pull his shirt off to maximise how much of his skin could be pressed against yours. You bat it away, wrinkling your nose as you felt the material of Ghost’s t-shirt, wet with Gaz’s cum, stick to your skin.

“That was fucking beautiful.” Ghost murmured, kissing each of you in turn, one of his partners snuggled up against each shoulder. “Fuckin’ beautiful.”

Gaz hummed. “What about you, Si? You cum yet?”

“I can wait.” Simon murmured.

“Hell no,” Gaz struggled to sit up. “You’re not doing that again.”

“We cum, you cum. Simple, as.” You sat up with him, both staring Ghost down like it was a challenge.

He laughed. “You’re both insatiable. You can take me apart later, I promise, but right now both of you are going to sit here, and have a drink and a snack.”

Gaz huffed. “Can’t make us do that.”

Ghost grabbed the back of his neck again. “Yes, I can. You’re not denying me my aftercare, Gaz.”

“Of course not, Si.” You cupped his face. “Aftercare away. Then later, we’ll tear you into pieces, in exchange.”

Ghost sighed. “I’d like that.”

#ghost x reader #simon ghost riley x reader #gaz x reader #kyle gaz garrick x reader #ghost x gaz x reader #poly relationship #ghost x gaz #cod #call of duty #cod mw3 #cod mw2 #mw3 #mw2

[denimbex1986]

'Irish actors claim they have been treated like the poor relations in the film industry for decades despite big government tax breaks for major studios.

LA-based actor Alan Smyth revealed that Colin Farrell, Ruth Negga and Cillian Murphy have signed a petition for fair and equal pay for native performers and crew.

Over 2,500 people have added their signatures online.

It says the Irish diaspora in the US and worldwide strongly support the efforts of Irish Actors Equity, which is in talks with several government ministers to secure a guarantee “that Irish performers will not be subject to lesser terms and conditions regarding their intellectual property rights than international performers in similar roles”.

“This, unfortunately, has been the case for many years,” it states.

The petition is still open as Irish Equity plans to hold a solidarity rally with the striking SAG-AFTRA union and the Writers Guild of America today.

Smyth, who is from Dundalk, has first-hand experience of the set-up on both sides of the Atlantic. He has reaped the benefits of the American system where actors traditionally got residual cheques whenever their performances are aired.

The threat now, he says, is that the so-called “streamer” networks are imposing drastic cuts to the value of the residuals.

Hence, the strikes.

“It’s a lot worse in Ireland,” said the actor, who has starred in a number of big TV dramas, including CSI: NY and Criminal Minds.

“The system in Ireland is that the Irish cast and crew for the most part, unless it’s Colin or Cillian, are put on buyout contracts so don’t get residual payments.

“The awful thing about it is the Irish Government gives tax breaks to film and TV productions. Within the productions, the Irish cast and crew are paid far less than anyone brought over from England or the US. It’s 100pc discriminatory.

“Colin, Cillian and Ruth Negga have got behind the petition. They know how hard it is until you get to a point where you’re doing really, really well. I can really see how hurtful it is in Ireland.”

Actor Gerry O’Brien lodged a cheque for $800 (€735) yesterday for his role as an Irish man in Pirates of the Caribbean years ago. The payment covers just a quarter of the year.

He got a US contract for the job, rather than the typical Irish buyout one.

In contrast, he has earned just €54 in residuals in the last 20 years here. That was for an RTÉ TV series.

O’Brien said Equity wants a contract for Irish actors like that on offer to their British counterparts. The coveted UK contract sets out minimum pay rates, residual arrangements and other terms and conditions.

Irish production companies offer the buyout contracts on behalf of the major international studios when they are in town, he says.

A Dublin-based actor (27) did not want to be named for fear he would be “blacklisted” when going for jobs.

He has been following the Hollywood strike very closely.

“It shines a light on just how unfair the industry is,” he said.

“Those at the top are earning incredible amounts of money and profit. In a large part, it is due to those at the bottom scraping a living.

“I graduated from drama school in 2017. Last year, I made the most money I ever made working as an actor and that was €14,000. Obviously that is not sustainable.

“If you work on an Irish film, you get paid for the day of work and never see another penny. I routinely sign off my rights for €600 or €700 a day.

“I’m delighted that Cillian Murphy and Colm Meaney are coming out in support of small fry actors like myself.”

Actor Owen Roe has won many theatre awards during his career and his film appearances including Breakfast on Pluto, Intermission, Wide Open Spaces and Michael Collins.

He said actors here are “not prepared to go on strike” but it is an opportunity to inform younger ones of their rights.

“It’s far more competitive as well . There is AI and all those things. The whole buyout situation is not good for us.”

He was glad to see Cillian Murphy and other stars walk out of the Oppenheimer premiere in support of their US union.

“They don’t have to financially, I’d imagine,” he said. “It gives confidence to people who feel they are being exploited.

“I think it will be interesting to see what happens in America. If the whole thing of buyouts and residuals gets sorted. The attitude that we’re cheaper is offensive,” he said.'

#Cillian Murphy #Oppenheimer #Alan Smyth #Colin Farrell #Irish Equity #SAG-AFTRA #Ruth Negga #Owen Roe #Breakfast on Pluto #CSI: NY #Criminal Minds #Gerry O Brien #Pirates of the Caribbean #Colm Meaney #Intermission #Wide Open Spaces

[bonefall]

You mentioned that each Clan's dogwhistles sound and look a little different-- would you be willing to elaborate/give some examples?

WindClan

NEVER talks openly about their beliefs and is the best example of Thistle Law doublespeak. Tigerstar and Brokenstar are unpopular for obvious reasons, and the Clan as a whole leans towards Soft Traditionalism. On one side of their mouth, they'll talk about how they won Heatherstar's Campaign and how they rightfully conquered that land, but then turn around and frame the turn of the war as ShadowClan's underhanded snakery (in Clanmew it's literally "adderness").

"Fear" is a lot more common in their rhetoric. Fear of outsiders diluting their Clan, fear of wasting time and prey, fear of having things taken and stolen. The WindClan Massacre is invoked a LOT, because it's useful for making cats too emotional to think straight.

Here, we'll walk through BB!Mudclaw as an example. I'm going to mark every weasel word with an asterisk, let's see if you can figure out what's weird with it before the end.

Mudclaw speaks to Tallstar, claiming that the trading with BloodClan is opening up WindClan to being betrayed. "Scourge turned* on Tigerstar in the end, how can he be trusted now*? There was bounty for a while, but leafbare is coming* and we already* have so many mouths to feed. Snapper and Leo* arrived and now we're having troubles with the humans*. I'm just worried, I never want to lose so many Clanmates ever again*."

Scourge was acting in self defense

The trading is part of filling the deal that Tigerstar did not intend to honor

Starvation rhetoric

Sudden pivot to exclusionary language, Us vs Them

Refusal to use new names

Implying it's their fault

Massacre allusion

ShadowClan

Much more openly violent. A LOT of talk of glory, you could use these guys as a social case study. Crusades, winning the war with WindClan, the beauty of TigerClan, re-framing Ripplestar not as someone who wanted to help SkyClan but as a simple conqueror. They have lots of moments to invoke from their Great History.

The cost of that violence is downplayed. Like the Snowtuft example, they won't bring up the mother and children he slaughtered, just boast about their glorious ancestors fighting in the Crusades. They won't mention how they ripped kittens out of their nests, just how they bolstered ShadowClan's numbers. They'll frame the WindClan massacre as a final battle they triumphed over, leaving out how they ambushed and poisoned elders and apprentices.

RiverClan

"Glory talk" is downplayed in RiverClan, probably because they didn't actually take part in the Crusades. Instead, they focus on negative traits of mixed-blood cats (which they made up), accuse other Clans of being underhanded, and demand to be "heard."

And what THAT means is that they want to be able to derail any conversation they want. Interruptions of clanwide discussions, dismissing critique of Tigerstar and co, intentionally saying things that are divisive to cause fighting. They will prevent ANYTHING from being done unless it's the thing THEY want to happen.

I actually write Thistle Law supporters in RiverClan to be like... incredibly annoying. They don't say what they mean, they bring the Clan to a screeching halt, they literally dismiss the lesson of TigerClan. You cannot pin them down, they never admit to anything, you will only waste your time talking to them.

They also act on their bigotry in ways that are 'deniable'. Reedwhisker fell into the water? Must have been his thick ThunderClan blood pooling in his paws. A RiverClan cat should be able to pull themselves out. Of course you're listened to, Mistyfoot, you're deputy after all, what more do you want? Gaslighting. Making you doubt your own senses towards your unfair treatment.

ThunderClan

A sort of 'mix' of ShadowClan and WindClan tactics. ThunderClan is THE Fire Alone Clan, you could count the Thistle Law supporters and the Hard Traditionalists on one hand, but has a battle-centric history they tend to tap into.

Listen for "glory," talk about 'avoiding humiliation,' starvation rhetoric. ThunderClan has an absolute bounty with their forested territory, that last one is almost always code for wanting to exclude or eliminate people like Daisy and Purdy.

When Thornclaw became deputy under Bramblestar, he was very, very careful about his escalations, and mostly focused on manipulating Bramble himself. He was VERY aware that the Clan wouldn't take another Mixed Clan Meeting like the stunt he pulled in TNP.

Even the impostor in TBC overplayed his hand, the rebellion was born out of ThunderClan itself.

#Thistle Law #Better bones au

[sirianasims]

Samuel stopped visiting us. I spoke to Kailani, but we agreed to let them figure it out themselves. Still, it was hard to watch. Freya wasn’t at all her usual, fiery self.

She had always had quite the temper. I stubbornly claimed that she must have gotten it from Katherine, but I knew that my own temper had been terrible as well, at least before I learned to control it.

It wasn’t too bad when she was younger, but the older she got, the worse her tantrums had become. Like Katherine, she could be glorious in her fury if she felt that something was unfair. But after losing her friendship with Samuel, she became despondent.

Normally, I’d be happy that my teenage daughter was this easy to get along with, but Freya’s lack of snarky comebacks was worrying. She never argued with me, but she also never laughed.

She barely even smiled, except when spending time with either Grace, our boxer, Daisy, or the new cat, Turtle.

The house had felt too empty with just old Mimi left, so we had gotten them to replace Cooper and Zoe.

I knew from experience how helpful pets could be when everything seemed hard to deal with, so I was glad that Freya had bonded so quickly with Daisy, but I was still starting to get worried. Maybe she had inherited my tendency towards depressive episodes? Something needed to change.

“I’m going to bed, goodnight.”

“Freya, I know that you don’t want to talk about it, but I’m worried about you.”

“I’m fine, dad. Just leave me alone.”

“OK, fine, I get that you don’t want to talk to me, but do you want to talk to your mother, then? Maybe go visit her for a while?”

She turned on me, her voice suddenly dripping with bitterness.

“Oh, so you can once again get rid of me when I’m too much trouble? Like mom did so she could be alone while fucking Conrad? Or like you did when I was little so you could fuck, well, everyone?”

For a moment, I was speechless. Shock, anger and shame were all fighting to take the lead.

“Freya, what the…”

She wiped her eyes and started turning away.

Anger won.

“FREYA! YOU WILL STAY THE FUCK HERE UNTIL I’M DONE TALKING TO YOU!”

She froze, her eyes wide. I had never yelled at her like that before.

I took a deep breath to calm myself. Then I spoke through gritted teeth.

“Talk to me. Now.“

For a moment, neither of us spoke. Freya glared at a spot on the floor, blinking away tears.

I took another deep breath. I felt the connection to my daughter floating in the air like a faint line, thin as a hair.

One wrong move from either of us and it could snap.

My anger dissipated.

“Freya, honey, that was out of line. And so was I. I’m sorry for yelling. You need to tell me what is going on, because I am trying to help you. Why would you think I could ever want to get rid of you?”

And then, finally, she started talking. About how I had never wanted her in the first place, that she was an accident. How she had ruined my life and how no one could ever love her.

Everyone just kept leaving her – me, her mother, Samuel.

I was devastated. I tried to sort through all the half-truths and misunderstandings, to explain to her how loved she was. I explained that I had to let her go when she was little because I was being a terrible father, and how happy I had been when she moved back in four years ago.

I wanted to be completely honest with her. I told her how much I was struggling during the first seven years of her life. With depression, with alcohol. How I had been trying to run away, not from her but from myself, from the guilt of feeling inadequate as her father.

She was quiet through it all, tears slowly rolling down her cheeks.

“Freya. I love you and Gracie more than anything. You girls are my life. And you were there first. I’m sorry that I wasn’t ready when you arrived, but that was not your fault. Your mother and I made a lot of mistakes, but you are the one thing we ever got right. I’ve done my best to catch up, to be the dad you deserve -“

I stopped, my voice breaking.

Freya stepped closer and clung to me like she was drowning. I held her tight.

“I love you, monkey. Forever and always.”

“I love you too, dad.”

beginning / previous / next

#duchellilegacy #duchellichapters #duchelligen3 #eric duchelli #freya duchelli

[cherokeecharles]

#Hottakes #11: White Mediocrity at The Grammy’s Isn’t a Surprise Anymore.

It wouldn’t be award season if we weren’t talking about white mediocrity being rewarded or people being surprised that it was awarded. The never-ending saga of ‘I can’t believe Taylor won over [insert great black artist here]’ is now plaguing my timeline for the time being and what better way to break my silence?

During my writing hiatus, I went on an inspiration scavenger hunt—poking around pop culture, TV, music, and yes, even sports (times are tough, sisters). Yet, nothing sparked that writing flame. Then came the Grammys buzz, the usual drill: nominations, snubs, and the betting game of who should win versus who will win. We all would like to think of ourselves as Grammy psychics to some degree. So, imagine my surprise at the post-Grammys shockwave. Why the gasps for the winners? Why the faux shock when black artists get the snub? And seriously, why keep submitting music if it's playing hide-and-seek with recognition? It's like sending your resume to a job that never calls back—maybe it's time to rethink the application process, huh?

Jay-Z delivered a powerful speech while receiving his honoree Hip Hop award. Rather than talking about his accomplishment he went on to give a rant about his wife, Beyoncé, being the most awarded Grammy winner yet always falling short of her peers of winning the coveted Record of the Year award. The speech was compelling and it reflected what many of us said for years. I would’ve been moved by the speech if I knew they weren’t going to keep submitting their music to be snubbed yearly. The speech reflected all of my thoughts of Beyoncé being categorically snubbed every year for that award that we know is likely missing from her résumé. However, I don’t like the fact that it’s being deemed that she’s missing this one thing from greatness. Beyoncé is great on her own and her career, music, and work ethic back up that claim. I think that it’s unfair that her ‘shortcoming’ amounted to an award where the line is always moving.

The award show progressed, and we’re all left to simmer with Jay-Z's speech about snubbing at the Grammys. The end of the award show comes around, and the last and biggest award is Album of the Year. The album of the year award was presented by the one and only Celine Dion. The Album of the Year award is a coveted award, it’s essentially the album that shaped the year we just went through, and the cultural and social impact of said album are factors into who gets the win, or so I thought. The category for album of the year was groundbreaking on its own because this is the first time it has ever had seven of the eight nominations be women. The category on its own with poised for someone who showed great artistry through one album that spoke to the public, and to the Grammy voters. Imagine the lack of surprise on my face when Taylor Swift won. Taylor Swift’s album Midnights won the most desired award beating out SZA’s SOS, Miley Cyrus’ Endless Summer, Janelle Monae’s Age of Pleasure, etc. This Album of the Year award made Taylor Swift the most winningest recipient of the award receiving the most nominations and win in this category.

The aftermath was a storm of criticism that hit Taylor Swift like a hurricane. From her award-acceptance antics to dropping her album bombshell mid-show and dragging poor Lana Del Rey on stage, Swift's behavior was undeniably tacky. But let's not kid ourselves—the uproar wasn't just about her manners. It was the fact that she clinched the Grammys' holy grail, becoming the all-time winningest. Viewers collectively winced, wondering why Taylor got the crown instead of, say, SZA. We act shocked, but really, we've read the exposés, pondered the think pieces, and still tune in annually. Artists keep submitting, black artists keep getting snubbed. If Taylor's the poster child for white mediocrity, why do we willingly sign up for this annual masochism? It's like déjà vu with a side of irony.

I'm not exactly Taylor Swift's number-one fan (and never will be), and I join the chorus of critics giving her the side-eye. But what grinds my gears is the phony shock everyone's putting on. Sure, there are more deserving artists out there, and it's downright ludicrous that a powerhouse like Beyoncé hasn't snagged the top prize. Yet, when does the surprise party end? We've witnessed Grammys snubs so brutal they make 2024 look like a tea party. That's why Jay-Z's speech didn't move my needle. Valid points, definitely, but let's be real, you're still cashing in those Grammy chips and probably gonna play again. Our beloved artists secretly crave that Recording Academy nod and that's why they keep tossing their tunes into the Grammy ring. It's like a messed-up lottery where, once in a blue moon, an artist (looking at you, Zayn and The Weeknd) says, "Enough is enough!" If it's a rigged game, why keep rolling the dice? If you know the ending, why splurge on the movie ticket?

The Grammys will persist as the top accolade artists crave for artistic validation. However, it's crucial to grasp that Grammy wins don't make or break careers. Complaining without a push for change is futile. The Grammys will keep snubbing until artists stop submitting. Despite acknowledging the celebration of mediocrity, there's a glaring lack of transformative action. Perhaps, giving Grammys less power than fans and artists do is key. Even Beyoncé, the greatest artist, faces snubs. Does she need another Grammy to prove her greatness? No, because she already is. Embracing this mindset could make music more enjoyable, sans the Grammy obsession.

What do you guys think? Do you think artist should continue to submit their music to the Grammys? Do you think the Grammys are losing their credibility every year go on? What can the Grammys do to gain back the credibility?

Let me know what you think!

Until then…

Cherokee🤎✨

#hottakes #grammys #grammys 2024 #SZA #Taylor Swift #Beyoncé #Miley Cyrus #Pop Culture #snubs #black femininity #black womanhood #black pop culture #black blogger #lana del rey #olivia rodrigo

[deadbyoffering]

25 things that the killers (mainly Mr. Carter) are not allowed to do 

Due to the “chainsaw Myers incident,” killers are not allowed to steal or borrow a another killers weapon or power for trials. Yes, it was awesome, but it puts an unfair advantage to the survivors.

The Legion are not allowed to steal Jeffrey’s bottles and make them into Molotov cocktails than claim it’s their new power rework.

Just because Mr. Carter is called The Doctor and have medical knowledge, doesn’t mean he’s a license doctor or thee doctor or the best doctor there ever was. He’s not allowed to claim so.

Mr. Carter is not allowed to ask the survivors if any would volunteer for any kind of his experiments outside their campsite.

Killers are not allowed to play dark souls boss music when there’s a brawl or argument between killers. No, not even music from Spongebob.

Just because Miss Mora was a close associated with crows, doesn’t mean she’s their handler and hold responsibility for anything they do.

Lisa is not allowed to “borrow” Mikaela’s “Book of Spells” to improve her power. May that monstrosity clone of yours be a lesson on using someone else’s magic without approval.

Mr. Carter is no longer allowed to assist Mr. Jeffrey with his “improvements” of his concoctions and formulas. Don’t ask.

Telling new arrivals that you can tame The Demogorgon with a tummy rub and rat meat is right out.

The Shape is not to be taunted with. Go ahead and see what happens on your accord.

The Nemesis's zombies are not toys, practice targets or crash dummies.

Mr. Carter and Mr. Jeffrey are not allowed to interact without the presence of a responsible overseer. Mr. Morrison does not count as a responsible overseer. Nor does Mr. MacMilian. Or Mr. Johnson. In fact, let's just keep the two of apart, period.

Mr. Hak's knives are not be construct into any kind of cosmetic. Yes Miss Lavoie, your earrings and spiked jacket are impressive, but both have been confiscated.

Mr. Johnson's camera is only for Mr. Johnson’s personal use only not the following: Shooting photo shoots, selfies, pictures of the wildlife and [Redacted]. Really?

Mr. Carter is no longer allowed to host game night, trivia night, movie night and any group activities of sort with his colleagues. Not even if you ask nicely. Or even with the survivors.

Mr. Carter is no longer allowed to argue with historical events with killers from the time period that the events took place. It was three days to clean up the aftermath from your argument with Tazan about the “Fall of the Samurai in Feudal era.”

No one is not allowed to declare war on any animal, thing or even The Entity (Me).

The Legion No one is not allowed to contribute to this list. That is not a challenge.

Mr. Carter is not allowed to go to fan conventions. Let alone use them as recruitment for volunteers for his experiments. Not even [Redacted] conventions.

"For The Entity" is not an acceptable justification for any decision. Unless I required you to do.

Yes, forum trolls are annoying. No, they don't automatically become Survivors.

Mr. Quinn is no longer allowed to offer the solution of “Use more guns" to any problem. Or "Get bigger guns."

Mr. Carter is not allowed to organize authorize or create in any form a “Dead by Daylight Derby”, staring the Demogorgon, Maurice the Horse, Talbot Grimes, Victor Deshayes, The Legion, The zombies, Kazan Yamaoka and Meg Thomas.” No…Just no.

Joey is not allowed to get on the PA system and announce to the survivors that he just won “The Game”. You know what, Joey is just never allowed on the PA system for any reason, ever.

The Legion is not allowed to arrange, schedule, advertise, promote or sell tickets to "cage matches" between The Executioner and anybody.

See more 25 things that the killers are not allowed to do

Next

#dbd #dead by daylight #meg thomas #the legion #pyramid head #the oni dbd #the hag #the artist #the doctor #the deathslinger #the demogorgon #the entity #michael myers #the trickster #the ghostface #the blight #nemesis #dbd the clown #25 things X are not allowed to do #things that the killers are not allowed to do

[leclercarchive]

I: So we've established since Mexico that you're better at chess than Pierre Gasly?

Charles: I am! [talking to Hamilton: oh yeah we have to play for sure] I am better than him

I: He claims that you won one game and now you're telling everyone in social media and feels that it's a bit unfair

C: Yeah but we only played once, I won 100% of the times which is a good record to have but i'm sure we'll have many more chances to play together

I: Tell us more about what you got up to on Tuesday

C: Oh yes, Ayrton is my one and only idol I've ever had, and the fundation, the family, invited me at the fundation in São Paulo , also got the chance to see the car he raced in, a few helmets. it was very emotional and the family has been welcoming me in the best way possible. Viviana has been explaining to me many stories and also the stories of the helmetes and the cars in there. It was a very special moment for me for sure

I: How comfortable are you to get a hat-trick of pole position?

C: It's always nice, but at the same time, for me it matters the most on Sundays. And at the time we don't really have the car in order to make those pole positions a win, or at least a really good result on Sunday so we really have to work in that and thats where we all are focusing at the moment. We still have work to do, id be amazing to be on pole but id rather have a win than a pole this weekend

I: Do you think the harder tyres compounds here in Brazil compared to Mexico could help you win the race?

C: I don't think it has a big influence in our perfomance, i think its more down to the track characteristics. But again I think its very difficult to put it this weekend, specially in sprint weekends, FP1 is super important, its very easy to put a foot in the wrong direction, if thats a good expression? - And then the whole weekend you cant recover if you make a mistake in fp1 with the setup so i'ts going to be super imporant to have a strong FP1 and hopefully that'll be a positive weekend for us

#charles leclerc #f1 #brazilian gp 2023 #interview

[justinssportscorner]

A groundbreaking study that was sponsored by the International Olympic Committee and released late last week sought to compare a range of athletic abilities between trans athletes and their cisgender counterparts. The finding that trans women athletes are at a relative disadvantage in many key physical areas relating to athletic ability and perform worse on cardiovascular tests than their cisgender counterparts could be the first step in fighting back against the conventional wisdom conservatives have spread that trans women’s participation is inherently unfair. Over the last several years, few anti-LGBTQ policies have taken off as quickly within mainstream politics as those banning trans women and girls from women’s and girls’ sports. Prompted by the success of trans college swimmer Lia Thomas, who won a national championship during her senior year, dozens of conservative states and sports administrators rushed headlong into outright bans on trans women’s rights to participate equally in sports. The political argument seemed simple; natural, even. We all know men are superior athletes to women, conservatives argued, so allowing trans women to compete with women would be inherently unfair. Because it  felt like common sense to a lot of people, it made for a compelling political argument. But the study that the IOC commissioned, and the University of Brighton conducted, found that while trans women are stronger in some respects, like grip strength, cis women have stronger lower bodies. The study also found that trans women have a similar bone density as their cis women counterparts, which rebuts a frequent refrain from conservatives who’ve argued otherwise to justify banning trans girls and women from sports. All the participants in this study participated in competitive sports or took part in physical training at least three times a week. The 35 trans athletes had to have completed at least one consecutive year of hormone replacement therapy. It’s just one study, so we should avoid drawing grand conclusions from it, but, at the very least, the study shows that the bodies of trans women who’ve been on at least one year of hormone replacement therapy are very, very different from cis men’s bodies. In their conclusion, researchers cautioned against hurdling into blanket bans on trans women’s participation in women’s sports and declared that using data comparing cis men and cis women’s bodies to justify these bans is wrong. It has become commonplace for anti-trans campaigners to make arguments against trans participation in sports by citing the difference between cis men’s and cis women’s bodies; in other words, pretending that trans women’s bodies are identical to those of cis men’s. [...] Then again, the trans athlete debate has never really been about fairness or safety in women’s sports. It’s always been about putting laws on the books that legally define trans women as men as a precedent for passing more anti-trans laws unrelated to sports. So this research will likely not make a difference in red state legislatures.

Katelyn Burns for MSNBC.com on the new study partially backed by the IOC that refutes anti-trans claims about trans athletes (04.22.2024)

Katelyn Burns wrote an opinion column on MSNBC.com pushing back against the anti-trans justifications used to ban trans women in women's sports, as a new study funded partially by the IOC published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine reveals that that trans athletes are at a disadvantage compared to their cisgender counterparts.

See Also:

PinkNews: Trans athletes could actually be physically disadvantaged in some areas, IOC-backed study finds

LGBTQ Nation: Trans women athletes may actually have disadvantages compared to cis women

#Katelyn Burns #MSNBC.com #Transgender Sports #Transgender #Sports #IOC #Hormone Replacement Therapy #HRT #LGBTQ+ #University of Brighton #British Journal of Sports Medicine

[silyabeeodess]

An Overthinker’s Reaction to Neige Blanche (Twisted Wonderland)

I finished reading Book 5 of the game’s English version a couple days ago, and something’s been bothering me about its ending compared to previous chapters. While the other chapters thus far have done a great job with their independent stories for each of the student-villain parallels, the ending of Book 5 and its message left me feeling sour.  I couldn’t really place exactly why for a while, because my immediate thoughts on the ending as I was reading it didn’t seem justified for how I knew the story needed to go for its theme to truly carry weight; however, the more I’ve thought about it, I’ve drawn it to one conclusion:

Despite being based on Snow White and her pure nature, I do not like Neige Blanche or think he’s all that great a person--or even a true match to Snow White in personality.    

This may seem unfair due to Neige’s very brief appearance in Twisted Wonderland so far, but there’s some off things about him I can’t shake and I mainly just want to get these thoughts out of my head. Because it still hasn’t been that long since the chapter dropped and I want to avoid spoilers, I’ll elaborate further below the cut: 

I’ll say this right off the bat because I can already see the argument: I don’t care that Night Raven College lost the Song and Dance Championship.  For one thing, based on the foreknowledge we’re given that the Royal Sword Academy constantly wins and that even minor events in the stories/special events have the player character get accustomed to losing makes the SDC loss kind of expected as it’s still early in the game’s main story.  For another, plot-wise, the moral Vil has to learn about accepting himself and his own successes as an individual despite falling behind Neige would’ve likely fallen flat had NRC won since winning would’ve only been giving him the external validation Vil’s been after.  NRC winning also wouldn’t have given us the very real detail that Vil’s self-acceptance is going to take time.  This aspect of the chapter was handled extremely well.  Exactly why NRC lost though, is another matter--and I don’t mean the part about Rook making the deciding vote...

The SDC is described as being a premiere competition taking the best vocal artists and performers between the schools for the entertainment/music industry to seek out budding talent with massive reach in Twisted Wonderland’s world.  Despite this, however, we’re supposed to accept that Neige’s group not only won with a simple children’s song, but won despite having a completely poor performance. How come? In short, thanks to cute points. Allow me to pull some quotes from Chapter 60:

“All those dance moves are so simple, anyone could do them.  They’re not even in sync.”

“One of ‘em almost fell over! Neige helped him catch himself, but all of these guys look like they could go toppling at any second.”

“Frankly, the quality is nothing worthy of note.”

“They’re dancing is out of sync and their harmonies are clunky at best... but I’m glued to the performance.”            

This isn’t just the NRC team describing the Neige’s group’s performance, but outsiders in the film crews as well.  The only reason people were “awestruck” by it is because they thought they dwarves were kids and somehow that made it more “family accessible.”  Fine, since this is a competition based on popular vote as opposed to judges, I can accept the win wouldn’t necessarily be based on difficulty or actual skill.  I would’ve even accepted it if everyone voted simply because Neige was in the act because there’s plenty of people in the world who show favoritism and can’t be objective.  However, let me ask you this: Would you think that the average primary school choir would deserve to win a competition like American Idol or Britain’s Got Talent?  Because that’s what this effectively is: A show where people are expected to perform on a professional level, but somehow, an amateur act made it into the final round.  

Neige claimed they practiced hard, but the descriptions of their performance say otherwise.  You could say that, despite all their effort, they just couldn’t improve.  However, we have to keep in mind that the dwarves are not actual kids, Neige himself is a professional performer like Vil, and they should’ve had the time to train and prepare just like the NRC team.  Furthermore, from the way Vil in this same chapter manages to describe the NRC group as being “outplayed” despite this, I can only conclude that using the dwarves for their childlike appearance was a tactic with no basis on actual talent.  Because people tend to feel sad and guilty when kids lose, so they’re going to give them more leeway than teenagers and adults.  This is a complete slap in the face to what the competition is supposed to the be.  It’s not emotionally resonating or captivating: It’s manipulative.  

Spinning off this to finally focus a little more on Neige himself, also in Chapter 60, he describes that his whole reason for joining the competition was “because he wanted to share some special memories with his friends at school.”  On the surface, that sounds like a wholesome line, but what do Neige’s friends have to do with this?  We can assume that the dwarves naturally are his friends, mimicking Snow White’s relationship with her own batch of seven.  The problem with this though is that that would be like Vil picking only Pomefiore students because they share a dorm or excluding Deuce, Ace, Grim, and the player from the auditions because of the fight they had at the start of the Book.  Neige picked his friends to perform with him?  In a massive competition representing his school and involving actual prospects in the music/entertainment industries?  Despite the fact that they can’t sing or dance worth a flip and likely showed little to no signs of improvement as the weeks of training gearing up to the competition went on?

Did the Royal Sword Academy not have an audition process like NRC? Because there is no way the dwarves would have passed it if they were as bad as they were at the actual competition despite all the practice they claim to have had for it.  Granted, we can say the same from our main four freshman at NRC, but even if we ignored the reason why Ace and Deuce were specifically picked (for being a gamble, but both with unique qualities to bring to the group), we can also confidently say that they improved enough to perform well.  We can’t say that for the dwarves.  Therefore, this means one of two things: We’d either have to believe that everyone at RSA is just as bad as them if not worse or that, again, the dwarves weren’t picked on actual merit.  And going off Neige’s friend line... they weren’t.  This means that countless performers at RSA were denied the opportunity to show off their talent and potentially get actual deals simply because Neige wanted his friend group with him.  That is garbage.  

Now, I don’t think Neige is a bad person: I didn’t see any strong hints of his kind, bubbly personality being fake or that he might intend to cause harm.  However, based on what I just explained, I do think he’s an inconsiderate and thoughtless person.  He might not have thought of how picking his friend group meant that he stepped over a lot of talented people who truly deserved the chance to perform on stage at the SDC, or that using the child factor of his performance was a very dirty tactic for a competition that was supposed to be based on talent.

That’s the reason I don’t think Neige completely works as a Snow White parallel.  Snow White could be too trusting/innocent at times, but she wasn’t clueless and did consider how her actions affected others.  When she scared the forest animals after fleeing into the woods, she apologized for it even though it was a simple mistake due to her own fears.  When she entered the dwarves’ cottage for the first time with the intention of hiding out there, she knew she couldn’t just stay there for free and did her best to be useful.  I don’t see Neige showing that same level of consideration toward anyone--be it his competitors or his schoolmates.     

Allow me to bring in the headmaster of RSA, Ambrose, into this, since he also does something similar, and it’ll lead to my final point. When Ambrose speaks with Crowley, he pretty much laughs to the latter’s face about winning the competition and how they’ll soon make it an even one-hundred victories between their schools.  Even though he’s light-hearted about it and is friendly with Crowley, you can tell that it still gets to NRC’s headmaster.  Why wouldn’t it?  That’s rubbing salt into a long festering wound.  No one likes to lose--especially that often over the course of several years--and commenting about how NRC has constantly lost shows a major lack of tact from Ambrose.  

While it’s still too early to say, this indicates a trend with most of the hero-parallel characters.  This behavior is that of good people who are used to winning and getting their way without struggle or consequence, those who don’t earn their victories.  Right now, they seem like fairytale protagonists who skipped the actual story and jumped straight to their happy endings. Think of the relationship between Kalim and Jamil: Kalim is a good person, but he’s also incredibly spoiled and has had most hardships cleared out of the way for him since a young age.  This allowed him to be inconsiderate of Jamil without meaning to, hurting someone he’s always considered a best friend.  I can see the RSA characters falling into a similar category: Neige, the actor the gets all the best roles and stays on top of the industry no matter what, and Ambrose, the headmaster whose school has won countless victories in a constant streak without fail.  The differences between them both and Kalim though is that we as an audience have had time to see more of Kamil’s good qualities and that he has learned a lesson after Book 4.  I haven’t followed the JP version of the game to know how much has been expanded upon with the RSA characters in later books.  Still, I can see this being heavy potential for their development.

Right now though, it makes the RSA gang very hard to like.  For me, it’s not a matter of disliking them because they’re acting as the current antagonists--the literal definition; still not villains, mind you--but because of their poor show of behavior and oblivious regard of it.  In contrast, I never had a problem with Leona’s nephew and brother because neither of them could help the position they were born into any more than Leona and Cheka is still a child who can’t understand how complicated the family/royal situation is.  Neige, meanwhile, should’ve at least remotely understood how hard it is for performers to fight for their chance to shine, since that’s his industry, and should’ve put more focus on merit rather than his own desires for the competition.   

#twisted wonderland #neige blanche #video games #analysis #essay

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Kemi Badenoch

Published: Mar 20, 2024

In 2021, a manager at Lloyds bank took an internal EDI (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) course, during which he asked how he should handle a situation where someone from an ethnic minority background uses a word that would be considered offensive if it was said by a white person.

Lloyds branded him a racist for quoting the “n-word” as part of his question, and he was dismissed for gross misconduct. He then took his former employer to a tribunal, won his claim for unfair dismissal, and was awarded £800,000 in compensation.

This is not an isolated incident. For several years now, I have read reports of employers misapplying equality law under the guise of EDI initiatives. Sometimes it is egregious gold plating as above.

Most employers mean well when they set about to improve diversity and inclusion. However, actions such as positive discrimination and quotas are unlawful, even if used to diversify an organisation. This Government believes that EDI policies should unite rather than alienate employees, and crucially uphold fairness and meritocracy.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of snake oil about. Just this week, a government minister found that the training materials for one of their departmental quangos included references to outmoded concepts like “unconscious bias”, and “white privilege”, and used a picture of someone holding up a placard saying “white silence costs lives”.

All of this bunkum was contained in mandatory training for 1,400 poor souls whose primary job is to help further the Government’s economic agenda.

Rooting out the rubbish

With the number of organisations out there – and the frequency of these incidents – it is unreasonable to expect government ministers to intervene every time this happens. And no one should assume that a future government’s ministers will be as vigilant as current ones are in rooting out rubbish.

That’s why last year the Government set up an independent Inclusion at Work Panel to address this issue in an evidence-led way. The panel was made up of private and public sector experts, and was advised by a leading professor at Harvard University.

We tasked the panel with looking at the latest research to understand how employers in Britain are applying EDI, and how we can help them improve their practice. Our goal was clear: diversity and inclusion should never put any individual or group at a disadvantage, and should never damage cohesion and morale in the workplace.

The panel has today published its final report. Much of it makes for concerning reading. The UK has seen an explosion of EDI roles in organisations. Studies found that the UK employs almost twice as many EDI workers per head than any other country. This same analysis estimates that EDI jobs in our public services are costing the taxpayer at least half a billion pounds a year.

Despite this, the new report shows that, while millions are being spent on these initiatives, many popular EDI practices – such as diversity training – have little to no tangible impact in increasing diversity or reducing prejudice.

In fact, many practices have not only been proven to be ineffective, they have also been counterproductive. Data from Employment Tribunal suggests that recent years have seen a notable uptick in cases brought using the Equality Act in comparison to the years 2013-17.

The report finds that, in some cases, employers are even inadvertently breaking the law under the guise of diversity and inclusion by censoring beliefs or discriminating against certain groups in favour of others.

What’s also concerning is how few employers are using evidence when making decisions. According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, only 1 in 4 business leaders say they consult data before coming up with new EDI initiatives. One in 4 say that their approach to EDI is reactive – for example, “in response to societal events like the Black Lives Matter protests”.

The panel found that organisations are crying out for better evidence on how they can practise diversity and inclusion in a way that widens their talent pool, while fostering belonging rather than division.

No group should be worse off

Sadly, even a prestigious and respected institution such as the RAF was recently found to have discriminated against white men in trying to improve diversity. No group should ever be worse off because of companies’ diversity policies – whether that be black women, or white men.

Performative gestures such as compulsory pronouns and rainbow lanyards are often a sign that organisations are struggling to demonstrate how they are being inclusive.

These clumsy diversity policies aren’t a substitute for rigorous, evidence-based measures that ensure everyone participates and thrives in the workplace.

As both Secretary of State for Business and Minister for Women and Equalities, I welcome the findings of this independent report. Over the next few weeks and months, the Government will consider seriously how we can best take forward its recommendations.

We will ensure that we do all we can to make sure that those entering or already in the workplace feel they will be treated fairly and according to merit.

[ Via: https://archive.md/JDB2Z ]

#Kemi Badenoch #DEI bureaucracy #diversity equity and inclusion #diversity #equity #inclusion #discrimination #racial discrimination #racism #diversity training #snake oil #DEI must die

[ukrfeminism]

3 minute read

A sacked civil servant has received a £100,000 settlement after she reported concerns about political activists operating in Whitehall and expressed her belief that people cannot change sex.

Anna Thomas, 32, had said that political activism was infiltrating the civil service and cited the dissemination of critical race theory in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

Thomas, formerly a work coach at a Jobcentre in Portsmouth, tried to raise the alarm about resources for staff, including an exercise asking employees to “assume” that they were racist.

Thomas also posted on an intranet blog expressing her opinion that people could not change sex. “One of the comments I made that they took massive offence to was [that] you cannot identify as a female. I believe you either are one or you’re not,” Thomas said. “It wasn’t intentionally meant to offend anyone — but they said transgender colleagues could find it offensive.”

Thomas, who first recorded concerns about the civil service in 2020, won the settlement with the help of the Free Speech Union campaign group.

Thomas said employees were directed to an “anti-racism hub” on the DWP intranet. She said that it encouraged civil servants to treat racism like Covid and “assume that you have it”, after the murder of George Floyd, a black man, by a white police officer in the US.

She said the hub had a statement by Peter Schofield, the permanent secretary, telling staff they were “responsible for being actively anti-racist”. Staff were also allegedly directed to the work of Robin DiAngelo, a critical race theorist who has written that white identity is “inherently racist”.

Thomas complained to the team responsible for the resources, as well as the whistle-blowing team, saying that she believed the DWP was breaching its impartiality obligations under the civil service code.

She was then investigated for misconduct, including allegations that she had said discriminatory things and was causing offence. However, she claims that her whistle-blowing complaint was upheld and the DWP’s behavioural science expert advised that the anti-racism hub was political. The DWP is said to have subsequently removed certain content from its online resources.

Thomas was dismissed in November 2021. She said she understood it was because she was found to have caused “upset”, “distress” and “offence”. She claimed to be the victim of unfair dismissal, belief discrimination, victimisation and harassment.

After three preliminary hearings, the DWP has agreed to pay her £100,000, of which £27,500 is for injury to her feelings. It did not admit any liability.

A DWP spokesman said: “We can confirm an employment tribunal claim was settled . . . without the need for further legal proceedings.”

[best-romanov-monarch]

Honourable electorate (well, those of you who are still with us), you simply MUST see this

We are simply THRILLED to have someone to argue with, now that this election is over.

25.Pyotr III. - *rings the bell behind OP's back* SHAME! Look, noone is going to argue that he was some misunderstood genius (though he WAS misunderstood in some regards, we suppose), and his one L was pretty significant, but to argue he was worse than, say, Anna Ivanovna just based on it?! For shame! IN THIS POLL: Got eliminated in the first round (big L), where he lost to Pavel I. (even bigger L). In the Worst Romanov poll, he was deemed much worse than Alexander I., but absolutely not as bad as Nikolai I., so. Overall not THE worst obviously, but one of the least esteemed members of this bracket certainly.

24.Pyotr II. - ...okay, that is just. Unfair. This guy was literally excluded from this bracket because HE WAS A FUCKING MINOR. He died at 14. You ghouls.

23.Nikolai II. - This one, though, is completely fair. His record was indeed just as terrible as OP claims, noone's gonna argue with that. IN THIS POLL: Well, except for our esteemed electorate, we suppose! He at least won in the first round over Mikhail I., so that's something. Of course the one who defeated him was Alexei I., and we are still unsure why. We suppose Alexei I. was indeed less of an unmitigated disaster than Nikolai II., low bars and all.

22.Nikolai I. - A bit unfair to place him under Anna Ivanovna mostly based on OP's misunderstanding of the Crimean War, but very well. Our knowledge of his domestic policy is somewhat limited, but what little we do know is that he certainly HELP matters in any way. IN THIS POLL: Was unequivocably named the second worst Romanov tsar after Alexander III.

21.Fyodor I. - "Obligatory insane one" well fuck you too sir??? That one's also unfair. The guy didn't really rule, like he wasn't even capable of it. Not a Romanov, so not in this poll, though we suppose one can ascertain what our electorate would think of him from the position of Ivan V. in this bracket.

20.Ivan VI. - Just like Pyotr II., this one was excused for being a fucking minor.

19.Konstantin Pavlovich - Not in this bracket, didn't rule, case closed.

18.Fyodor II. - Would probably be excused from the regular bracket, as well as in the admin's eyes, on account of being a minor. IN THIS POLL: Was mentioned in passing in the True Heir Of The Rurikids bonus poll, where his dad, and he by extension, would've won had it not been for those meddling Poles!

17.The Totally Real Dimitry I. - I'll be honest, I don't have much faith in this guy's ruling capabilities. His reign amounted to worming himself into the good graces of those damn Poles by making a bunch of promises he couldn't keep, then getting shanked when that fact came to light. He probably wouldn't even get to Moscow had it not been for Boris Godunov's untimely death. This guy is the ultimate proof that sometimes, not even luck can often compensate for raging incompetence. IN THIS POLL: Ranked after Boris Godunov and above Vasily Shuysky AND patriarch Filaret in the True Heir of Rurikids bonus poll. Make of that what you will.

16.Vasily IV. - We have absolutely nothing to add to the OP's assessment, other than sheer bafflement at the fact that he's not even lower. IN THIS POLL: Another True Heir of Rurikids candidate - and definitely the worst ranking one (together with patriarch Filaret, which is frankly horrific patriarch Filaret slander).

15.Ekaterina I. - Look, we're not saying she was a GOOD ruler, we just implore you to give the woman a break. When she ascended the throne, she had 18 years of marriage to Pyotr I. behind her. Of course she didn't do shit, she must've been so tired at that point! IN THIS POLL: Managed to beat Ivan V., only to then lose (after a rematch) to Alexander II., our eventual winner. Again, make of that what you will.

14.Ivan V. - See my opinion on Fyodor I. This guy arguably shouldn't even count. IN THIS POLL: Though it's true Ekaterina I. beat him in the first round of Best Romanov, which qualified him for the Worst Romanov. He beat his brother there, too, so in the esteem of this electorate, he seems to be pretty low.

13.Pavel I. - Again, OP was supremely unfair to this... Unique political thinker. He might not have gotten to put that many of his ideas in praxis, but he did have them; boy, did this guy EVER have ideas. IN THIS POLL: This electorate was much more capable of appreciating this super special snowflake of a monarch; he beat not only Pyotr III., but Sophia Alexeievna as well, which is a pretty good result! He was eventually unable to defeat his mother, but that's a feat that only one Romanov in this bracket achieved, so.

12.Alexander III. - OP really does not give this guy enough credit for laying the groundwork for the Russian Revolution. And the fact that it was ultimately Nikolai II. whose sheer incompetence caused it is no excuse, considering it was Alexander who ensured that Nikolai's education was so lacking. IN THIS POLL: The unquestionable winner of the Worst Romanov Monarch title, so. This electorate does not seem especially fond of him, needless to say.

11.Fyodor III. - A decent ruler, all things considered, but loses some points for being ultimately unable to prevent horrific factional warfare on his court from festering and ultimately erupting right after his death. IN THIS POLL: Another one with fairly ambiguous results; in the Best Romanov, he was knocked out in the first round by the eventual winner Alexander II., while in the Worst Romanov, he was proclaimed better than Ivan V., a literal puppet ruler.

10.Boris I. Godunov - A bit of a mixed bag, really; seemed to have been highly competent, but... The cementing of serfdom tho. That's kind of a black spot on his entire resume, innit? His reign was over not a good time for most Russians, but admittedly that wasn't all his fault. IN THIS POLL: As we mentioned when we talked about his son, he would've won the True Heir Of Rurikids if it wasn't for THE GODDAMN POLES.

9.Alexei I. - Funnily enough, his alleged passivity is a myth according to some? In fact, he had quite the temper, comparable to his youngest son, at least by some accounts. As for his ability to identify talent, which OP mentions... *softly* No. Admittedly, he also had competent advisors, but c'mon, this dude promoted old Morozov AND Nikon the Drama Queen. And of course OP doesn't mention the fact that he was a reactionary even by the standards of 17th century Russia, so. IN THIS POLL: Despite all of this, he was surprisingly successful on this poll. He pummelled Alexander III., no surprises there, but also won over the baby blue eyes of Nikolai II., before being rightfully eliminated by Alexander II.

8.Anna Ivanovna - Is way, way too high on this. To be fair, the way she come to full power was pretty badass, not gonna lie, but what she did with that power... Honestly all the good things about her reign could be attributed to people like Osterman, and if we give her credit for promoting him - well, she promoted fucking Biron even more, so there. Please, OP, stop letting the tsars off the hook for having shitty favourites, like just because they were favourites, that doesn't mean they HAD to be incompetent! Even Mikhail I. and Elizaveta Petrovna knew how to pick people to share power with, so what is your excuse for Anna?! IN THIS POLL: Won the elimination round against Nikolai I., then wasn't allowed in the round anyway, because the race was *this* close. Which honestly tells you all you need to know about the gal.

7.Mikhail I. - I mean... On paper, he certainly looks like a hypercompetent ruler, untill you realize that the stabilization after the Smuta was mostly the work of his dad. He deserves the credit for getting out of Filaret's way, at least, so. IN THIS POLL: He was bested by Nikolai II. on the Best Monarch, but according to Worst Monarch, managed to be not quite as terrible as Alexander III. Overall not a great result, but then, this is the electorate that snubbed good old Filaret, TWICE (on the True Heir Of Rurikids and Best Favourite bonus polls).

6.Ivan IV. - He's not in here, but by God I want to know where he'd end up. I mean, consolidation of the country and multiple fabulous military victories are awesome, but I myself would put him at the bottom just for Novgorod and the overall Stalin vibes he gives me. Giving me Stalin vibes in the 16th century is the worst crime of all. That said, I'll admit, he's a fairly controversial figure, so I wouldn't entirely begrudge OP for placing him... Well, pretty much anywhere in that ranking, really.

5.Elizaveta Petrovna - Look, I love her, can't say she was a BAD ruler per se... She certainly had a good nose on favourites and did show baseline competence. But she also had a tendency to spend tons of money on stupid shit and overall didn't do anything that amazing (other than remain on the throne for 20 years as an 18th century empress, which is admittedly impressive), so. IN THIS POLL: Pretty much trounced Alexander I., which is nothing to scoff at, but alas, then came the second round and Ekaterina II., a.k.a. the woman she had always been compared to, unfavourably. The poor gal didn't stand a chance.

4.Alexander I. - I mean the fucking Holy Alliance was pretty much his idea and we can attribute Napoleon's defeat more to his generals than him... But look, we can't stay mad at this dude. He was a wonderful little chaos gremlin, plus, he seems to have been more skilled at diplomacy than people give him credit for. IN THIS POLL: As mentioned above, this electorate has been pretty clear on whether they like him better than Elizaveta Petrovna, so. He was deemed to be less terrible than Pyotr III. at least, so that's something?

3.Alexander II. - Look, he's my favourite, but I'll admit, his military record is not great and even as reformer, he was only progressive by the standards of 19th century tsars, so. Fair. But I will say Ekaterina II. should still place lower than him. IN THIS POLL: Pulled out a narrow victory over Ekaterina II. and was proclaimed the Best Romanov Monarch.

2.Ekaterina II. - Overrated. As. Fuck. I mean to be fair her military record is pretty great, being good at imperialism means you are at least good at something, and she was definitely a competent administrator... But an enlightened ruler she was not and I wish people stopped calling her that. Rating her above Alexander II. is pretty preposterous. IN THIS POLL: Came in close second after Alexander II., so nothing to scoff at!

1.Pyotr I. - Yeeeaaah. I mean this guy was personally responsible for huge military victories, legal, structural, cultural etc. transformation of the Russian Empire, plus he worked with some of the greatest minds of late 17th century Russia... All the while being an absolute maniac in both good and bad sense of the word. And unlike Ivan the Terrible, he wasn't responsible for TOO many atrocities, so. His place at the top is pretty justified in my opinion. IN THIS POLL: Could've scored pretty high, but alas, in the first round, he was pitted against Ekaterina II. and our electorate just likes their toxic girlbosses too much to let him win that match.

#Youtube #russia #history #house of romanov

[phoenix]

Ahhh nutbunnies, I just remembered a time I DID win a thing. Oop.

It was an art contest. My elementary school held a contest to create bookmarks for some library event/encourage reading, whatever, and picked a winner from each grade, IIRC.

I drew Donatello from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles with the goofy slogan "Go ahead, make my day...BY READING." And it won for my grade! Many copies were made for people to acquire!

And some people got UPSSSSET! Because they claimed that the 'rules' such as they were, said you couldn't use known characters. Which...they didn't. I asked. If you wanna argue that it was unfair of me to use it to get recognised, sure, I can go along with that, but there was most explicitly NOT a rule against it.

If there WAS a rule against existing IP, then why did I win? is the obvious question "They don't know who the Turtles are!" Well let me assure you, they most certainly did, one of the teachers was the mother of a friend who was even more obsessed with the TMNT than *I* was.

One kid was so upset by this, he NEVER let me forget it, and said I cheated until the day we graduated high school years and years later.

I *might* still have one buried somewhere.

#Foenix rambles #storytime #I still take being called a cheater VERY personally

[away-ward]

hello! I wasn’t the anon who sent the last question however I do want to respond to some of the things you pointed. I think your characterization of emmy is way better than mine bc I always want the best for her but that doesn’t mean that the emmy in nf would make the choices I would make if I were in her shoes. I feel like my anger towards will definitely clouds my judgement of what is best for emmy if that makes sense. However, I wanted to point out a quote you said.

“If you love someone, you don't just throw that in their face.”

I agree with this statement, however, will has gone so low to the point where he throws his escapades with alex back at her face. I applaud em for being a better person but in my opinion if will goes low em should go LOWER. I know that that is a petty way of thinking but in em’s case she has to be around alex (around the woman that will has slept with multiple times). I just think it would be unfair for em to have to live with constant reminder’s of will’s past but will never has to live with any reminders of em’s life in san francisco. I just feel like em gets the shorter end of the stick… so if em wants to be petty one day she should have the right to do so.

Also I never know if I come across as harsh or argumentative over anon but I promise you that i’m not trying to be 😭

No worries. I never take it as harsh, unless there's clear hostility. I honestly thought they were new and didn't know what had gone on with No Apologies, which is fine. I just figured I take the opportunity to explain.

I get the desire for Emory to be petty. I've had my daydreams and fantasies too. But the "if they go low, you go lower" is such a horsemen way of looking at things. Who knows, maybe they'll influence her and drag her to that level. As always, Will is the source of his own undoing😂

And about Will throwing Alex in Emory's face being proof of his lack of love doesn't hit the same with me. He was actively denying his feelings and trying to hurt her. I meant if you're in a relationship with someone and you are claiming to love them, you don't say things designed to hurt them, which would be the situation if I were to write a fic where they're married.

People also keep saying that Emory has to keep company with Alex, as if she hasn't also slept with Alex. As if sleeping with Alex is something that's hard to do. As if Alex doesn't roll on her back, legs wide open for just about any character in this series. Pithom crew, Lev, Banks, Rika, Michael, Damon...

Will's not unique.

Emory got the short end of the stick? Everyone in this crew knows exactly how good Alex is, good enough to pay for her college education and a luxury apartment, and they still picked someone else to commit to and love.

Emory knew that Alex wasn't going anywhere when she asked Will to marry her. She's clearly not threatened in the least. Can you imagine? Will sleeps with this girl for the nearly five years and yet the second you appear in the scene and give him a second chance, he never thinks about going back to her? The power trip Emory should feel in Alex's presence?

But I know that most of the readers doubt Will's loyalty and commitment (I don't). And I know PD didn't write the Emory and Alex to have a competition, but if they did, Emory won that round and every round after.

Emory showing up everyday with a satisfied smile on her face, still warm from Will's bed, is petty enough for me.

Thanks for responding! I probably won't ever jump on this train, but I understand it's appeal.

--

Edit: coming back to say that I don't think my characterization of Em is better than any one's. I see her in a certain light, but it's not the correct one. It's just the one I enjoy. PD's proven that I can be so very wrong about these characters. If you see Em being petty and using her past to make Will realize he has a lot to make up for whatever her motive is, that's just as likely as her not doing it.

Sorry, i thought that when I read the ask, but then I never said it and I thought I really needed to😅

#asked and answered #asked and answered 190 #related to prev ask #asked and answered 189 #emory scott #willemmy #my dns tag

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Michael Tiknis

* * * *

The engraging unfairness of Dobbs. :: June 27, 2022

Robert B. Hubbell

        Standing alone, the abolition of an existing constitutional right that results in the subordination of women to theocratic state legislatures is anti-democratic, un-American, and a violation of human rights. Even so, the manner in which this Court chose to dispense with a right that is recognized in 174 of the world’s 195 nations was hurtful and cruel. Indeed, Alito’s opinion seems designed to give offense while inflicting injury.

....

        Let’s start with Alito’s biggest lie. He writes, “It is time. . . to return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” That misdirection has become the right’s antiseptic re-telling of the abolition of a constitutional right. The Dobbs decision returns the issue of abortion to “the people’s elected representatives” because it abolishes the right to privacy and personal autonomy over reproductive choice that was recognized for fifty years.

        A crude analogy is a mugger who claims that “I sent the victim to the emergency room,” ignoring the fact that the injuries he inflicted on the victim necessitated the trip to the hospital. “Returning the issue to people’s elected representatives” is the result of abolishing a constitutional right. First and foremost, Dobbs abolishes a constitutional right. Don’t let anyone confuse that fact by pretending Dobbs is really about empowering “the people’s representatives” to decide the issue. It is not.

        The decision is particularly maddening because it reverses the global trend toward greater liberty and freedom that marks the modern world. Yes, there are exceptions to that trend in the 21 nations that ban abortion entirely—an ignominious list the US has now joined: Andorra, Republic of the Congo, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Laos, Madagascar, Malta, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Palau, Philippines, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Suriname, and Tonga.

        Perhaps the most grievous sense of injustice flows from the fact that Dobbs marks the first time the Court has abolished a constitutional right—a right that was hard-won by millions of women alive today who fought for its recognition. The nearest comparison would be if the Court reversed its ruling that “separate but equal” education and accommodations are impermissible under the Constitution. Such a ruling would deny the equality and dignity of Black Americans; so, too, with the ruling in Dobbs. One class of Americans has been told “You are not equal; you are less than your male counterparts and the state will take control of the most basic aspects of your personhood.” Whenever we discuss Dobbs, we must acknowledge that its effect is to deny the equality and dignity of women.

        The sense of unfairness is compounded by the fact that at least two (and possibly three) justices lied to the Senate during their confirmation hearings. The opinion in Dobbs makes clear that the Kavanaugh and Gorsuch always believed that Roe was “egregiously wrong” from the start—an opinion they concealed from the Senate and the American people.

The fact that Senators Collins and Manchin have accused Gorsuch and Kavanaugh of misleading them during private interviews is shocking. Both justices should resign in disgrace. But like Kavanaugh’s infamous defense of his love of beer, he has no shame. He does not care that the world knows he is a liar. The sense of impunity and callousness makes their attack on the rights of women all the more heinous.

        The reactionary majority pretends that returning the issue to the states will restore balance and harmony to a democratic system. It will not. Instead, it will exacerbate inequality and divisiveness along geographic, wealth, and religious grounds. Americans in some states will have a right over reproductive choices, while others do not. Poor Americans will not have the same ability to circumvent abortion bans by traveling to other states. And some Americans will see their religious beliefs codified as law while others will be told that their personal beliefs do not matter.

        The patchwork of conflicting laws and elevation of differences will create two Americas. Affluent Christian evangelicals will surreptitiously travel to other states when their personal circumstances collide with their public professions of faith. Poor women will not have that choice but will be forced to give birth to children that the white, male, Christian-dominated legislatures have no intention of supporting with adequate healthcare, safe schools, or food security.

        Finally, in a breathtaking display of ignorance and insensitivity, four male justices dismiss the burdens and risks of pregnancy and the life-altering consequences of forcing a woman to give birth. That ignorance and insensitivity is not diminished by the fact that the reactionary majority includes a woman who is a member of a religious cult on the fringes of American society.

#Michael Tiknis #women's rights #human rights #illegitimate SCOTUS #Opus Dei Court #political cartoon #Robert B. Hubbell #Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter