#petard

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The "religious liberty" angle for overturning the overturning of Dobbs

Frank Wilhoit’s definition of “conservativism” remains a classic:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288

Conservativism is, in other words, the opposite of the rule of law, which is the idea that the law applies equally to all. Many of America’s most predictably weird moments live in the tension between the rule of law and the conservative’s demand to be protected — but not bound — by the law.

Think of the Republican women of Florida whose full-throated support for the perfomatively cruel and bigoted policies of Ron Desantis turned to howls of outrage when the governor signed a law “overhauling alimony” (for “overhauling,” read “eliminating”):

https://www.orlandoweekly.com/news/this-is-a-death-sentence-for-me-florida-republican-women-say-they-will-switch-parties-after-desantis-approves-alimony-law-34563230

This is real leopards-eating-people’s-faces-party stuff, and it’s the only source of mirth in an otherwise grim situation.

But out of the culture-war bullshit backfires, none is so sweet and delicious as the religious liberty self-own. You see, under the rule of law, if some special consideration is owed to a group due to religious liberty, that means all religions. Of course, Wilhoit-drunk conservatives imagine that “religious liberty” is a synonym for Christian liberty, and that other groups will never demand the same carve outs.

Remember when Louisiana decided spend tax dollars to fund “religious” schools under a charter school program, only to discover — to their Islamaphobic horror — that this would allow Muslim schools to get public subsidies, too?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/louisiana_n_1593995

(They could have tried the Quebec gambit, where hijabs and yarmulkes are classed as “religious” and therefore banned for public servants and publicly owned premises, while crosses are treated as “cultural” and therefore exempted — that’s some primo Wilhoitism right there)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-francois-legault-crucifix-religious-symbols-1.4858757

The Satanic Temple has perfected the art of hoisting religious liberty on its own petard. Are you a state lawmaker hoping to put a giant Ten Commandments on the statehouse lawn? Go ahead, have some religious liberty — just don’t be surprised when the Satanic Temple shows up to put a giant statue of Baphomet next to it:

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/17/639726472/satanic-temple-protests-ten-commandments-monument-with-goat-headed-statue

Wanna put a Christmas tree in the state capitol building? Sure, but there’s gonna be a Satanic winter festival display right next to it:

https://katv.com/news/offbeat/satanic-temple-display-installed-at-illinois-capitol-next-to-nativity-scene-menorah-decorations-snake-serpent-satanic-temple-springfield-christmas-tree

And now we come to Dobbs, and the cowardly, illegitimate Supreme Court’s cowardly, illegitimate overturning of Roe v Wade, a move that was immediately followed by “red” states implementing total, or near-total bans on abortion:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/15/paid-medical-disinformation/#crisis-pregnancy-centers

These same states are hotbeds of “religious liberty” nonsense. In about a dozen of these states, Jews, Christians, and Satanists are filing “religious liberty” challenges to the abortion ban. In Indiana, the Hoosier Jews For Choice have joined with other religious groups in a class action, to argue that the “religious freedom” law that Mike Pence signed as governor protects their right to an abortion:

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/21/legal-strategy-that-could-topple-abortion-bans-00102468

Their case builds on precedents from the covid lockdowns, like decisions that said that if secular exceptions to lockdown rules or vaccine mandates existed, then states had to also allow religious exemptions. That opens the door for religious exemptions to abortion bans — if there’s a secular rule that permits abortion in the instance of incest or rape, then faith-based exceptions must be permitted, too.

Some of the challenges to abortion rules seek to carve out religious exemptions, but others seek to overturn the abortion rules altogether, because the lawmakers who passed them explicitly justified them in the name of fusing Christian “values” with secular law, a First Amendment no-no.

As Rabbi James Bennett told Politico’s Alice Ollstein: “They’re entitled to their interpretation of when life begins, but they’re not entitled to have the exclusive one.”

In Florida, a group of Jewish, Buddhist, Episcopalian, Universalists and United Church clerics are challenging the “aiding and abetting” law because it restricts the things they can say from the pulpit — a classic religious liberty gambit.

Kentucky’s challenge comes from three Jewish women whose faith holds that life begins “with the first breath.” Lead plaintiff Lisa Sobel described how Kentucky’s law bars her from seeking IVF treatment, because she could face criminal charges for “discarding non-viable embryos” created during the process.

Then there’s the Satanic Temple, in court in Texas, Idaho and Indiana. The Satanists say that abortion is a religious ritual, and argue that the state can’t limit their access to it.

These challenges all rest on state religious liberty laws. What will happen when some or all of these reach the Supreme Court? It’s a risky gambit. This is the court that upheld Trump’s Muslim ban and the right of a Christian baker to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. It’s a court that loves Wilhoit’s “in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

It’s a court that’s so Wilhoit-drunk, it’s willing to grant religious liberty to bigots who worry about imaginary same-sex couples:

https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court

But in the meantime, the bigots and religious maniacs who want to preserve “religious liberty” while banning abortion are walking a fine line. The Becket Fund, which funded the Hobby Lobby case (establishing that religious maniacs can deny health care to their employees if their imaginary friends object), has filed a brief in one case arguing that the religious convictions of people arguing for a right to abortion aren’t really sincere in their beliefs:

https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20230118184008/Individual-Members-v.-Anonymous-Planitiff-Amicus-Brief.pdf

This is quite a line for Becket to have crossed — religious liberty trufans hate it when courts demand that people seeking religious exemptions prove that their beliefs are sincerely held.

Not only is Becket throwing its opposition to “sincerely held belief” tests under the bus, they’re doing so for nothing. Jewish religious texts clearly state that life begins at the first breath, and that the life of a pregnant person takes precedence over the life of the fetus in their uterus.

The kicker in Ollstein’s great article comes in the last paragraph, delivered by Columbia Law’s Elizabeth Reiner Platt, who runs the Law, Rights, and Religion Project:

The idea of reproductive rights as a religious liberty issue is absolutely not something that came from lawyers. It’s how faith communities themselves have been talking about their approach to reproductive rights for literally decades.

The Clarion Science Fiction Writers’ Workshop (I’m a grad, instructor and board member) is having its fundraiser auction to help defray tuition. I’ve donated a “Tuckerization” — the right to name a character in a future novel:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/clarion-sf-fantasy-writers-workshop-23-campaign/#/

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/11/wilhoitism/#hoosier-jews

[Image ID: Moses parting the Red Sea. On the seabed is revealed a Planned Parenthood clinic.]

Image: Nina Paley (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moses-Splits-Sea_by_Nina_Paley.jpg

CC0 1.0 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en

 — 

Kristina D.C. Hoeppner (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/4nitsirk/40406966752/

CC BY-SA 2.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

#pluralistic #religion #frank wilhoit #petard #gender #religious freedom #1a #abortion bans #dobbs #roe

[luckykittycolor]

Petard on ice

#physics #petard #ice

[budmaster420]

#IFTTT #Giphy #giphyupload #reaction #animals #retro #cats #weed #humour #les nuls #babyfoot #petard

[bottomsdotcom-dot-com]

Bottom 5 Ways to be Hoisted Aside From By One’s Own Petard 

You think being hoisted by your own petard is bad?!?

A classic turn of phrase. Unfortunately, the meaning of what a “petard” is has been lost in the annals of history. Ever since Jeeves stopped stopped answering questions in 2005 we have had no way of looking for the answer to this age old mystery. We can make our own guesses however as to what a petard might be. This one is simple really. Petard rhymes with leotard therefore this must just be an…

View On WordPress

#Fail #Hoisting #Lifting #Petard #Raising #Unsuccessful #Upwards

[biboocat]

Where does the phrase hoist with one's own petard come from?

Aside from historical references to siege warfare, and occasional contemporary references to fireworks, petard is almost always encountered in variations of the phrase "hoist with one's own petard," meaning "victimized or hurt by one's own scheme." The phrase comes from William Shakespeare's Hamlet: "For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his own petar." Hoist in this case is the past participle of the verb hoise, meaning "to lift or raise," and petar(d) refers to an explosive device used in siege warfare. Hamlet uses the example of the engineer (the person who sets the explosive device) being blown into the air by his own device as a metaphor for those who schemed against him being undone by their own schemes. The phrase has endured, even if its literal meaning has largely been forgotten.

#definition #phrase #petard

[babsi-and-stella]

Betty Davis photographed by Gilles Petard, 1975.

#Betty Davis #Gilles Petard #Nasty Gal #funk #singer #songwriter #70s #seventies #vintage #lingerie #fashion #make up #black is beautiful #photoshoot #album cover

[ashfae]

9yo: Mum, can I tell you a secret?

Me: Sure, what is it?

9yo: Let me whisper? It's a bit embarrassing.

Me: Okay. [leans in]

9yo: ....NEVER GONNA GIVE YOU UP, NEVER GONNA LET YOU DOWN!

Me: ...well played, kid. Well played.

#stories of my kids #never a dull moment #hoist on my own petard again

[tennessoui]

HOW DID I FORGET THE MR AND MR SMITH AU??

mr. and mr. smith au is so fun but it's also been so long since i posted about it that honestly im sure most everyone has forgotten about it!!!

but let's all enjoy the hijinks that mr. sith and mr. jedi are constantly accidentally pulling like

so they've just run away from their respective orders and they're both trying to pretend they're nothing more than a normal civilian settling into civilian life with their new husband and then some dude breaks into their new house while they're sleeping like WHAT does highly trained jedi and sith obikin do when they're also trying to pretend to be civilians who have no training ??

i can just imagine both of them snapping awake at the same time because the Force is giving them warnings but they both have NO idea what a civilian would feel/hear when there's a home invader so they can both hear some dude bumbling around in their kitchen but they don't know if a normal person would be able to hear that or if it's force gifted hearing & the Force is blaring an alarm but they know their partner wouldn't be able to feel that so they're just both lying in bed facing each other being like:

'i have a bad feeling. i should go check it out. no you shouldn't go check it out. it's my bad feeling. i should go check it out. no it's probably nothing go back to sleep. it's just a bad feeling. no i should go. you should not go. we both have no training in dealing with a home invasion---not that that's what this is i don't know what this is btw im just a farmer from tawl---but i should go'

and then the robber makes off with all their (obi-wan's) fancy kitchen stuff

#asks #mr. and mr. sith au #hoisted by their own petards!! #obikin #(idiots) (affectionate)

[opbackgrounds]

I don't think it's ever stated outright, but last chapter Hogback said he'd been working with Moriah for ten years, which is around the same time Cindry died. Since Cindry wasn't forced to take the vow with Moriah I'd assume that she was one of the first zombies they created together and they hadn't gotten the kinks worked out of the process yet. However, her tattoo/serial number would indicate otherwise, as she's labeled 400. The number isn't necessarily an indication of the order of creation (who knows how long Oars has been on ice waiting for a suitable shadow) but it stands to reason that they're at least somewhat related.

So if Moriah and Hogback had been making zombies for awhile before creating Cindry, then there's a chance that Hogback specifically requested that she not be forced to cooperate, possibly because he thought he could eventually win her over or desired something specifically about the shadow he'd stolen for her zombie. An icky situation all the way around, and it's something that puts her final rebellion against Hogback into a different light.

Would she have been able to fight back if Hogback had insisted on the pact? Probably not, but whatever reason he chose not to, it was the thing that ended up biting him in the end.

#opbackgrounds #one piece #ch457 #cindry #hogback #character analysis #hoist yourself by that petard motherfucker

[alexiethymia]

listen whatever you may think about their relationship…that little chin tuck/touch and mimzy’s whole ‘have fun with your li’l princess’ were cute

#hazbin hotel #charlie morningstar #alastor #tagging #charlastor #to be safe #cause to be fair it kinda is #I do like fanon charlastor #but it’s cute too in a platonic way #even if we know alastor is being manipulative #no wonder I’m intrigued by their dynamic regardless #since I came from the tua fandom and five and vanya/viktor’s bond was always interesting to me #I always like dynamics where a manipulative li’l sh*t gets hoisted by his own petard when faced with genuine trust

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Precaratize bosses

I'm touring my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me SUNDAY (Apr 21) in TORINO, then Marin County (Apr 27), Winnipeg (May 2), Calgary (May 3), Vancouver (May 4), and beyond!

Combine Angelou's "When someone shows you who they are, believe them" with the truism that in politics, "every accusation is a confession" and you get: "Every time someone accuses you of a vice, they're showing you who they are and you should believe them."

Let's talk about some of those accusations. Remember the moral panic over the CARES Act covid stimulus checks? Hyperventilating mouthpieces for the ruling class were on every cable network, complaining that "no one wants to work anymore." The barely-submerged subtext was their belief that the only reason people show up for work is that they're afraid of losing everything – their homes, their kids, the groceries in their fridge.

This isn't a new development. Back when Clinton destroyed welfare, his justification was that "handouts" make workers lazy. The way to goad workers off their sofas (and the welfare rolls) and into jobs was to instill fear in them:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/welfare-childhood/555119/

This is also the firm belief of tech bosses: for them, mass tech layoffs are great news, because they terrorize the workers you don't fire, so that they'll be "extremely hardcore" and put in as many extra hours as the company demands, without even requiring any extra pay in return:

https://fortune.com/2022/10/06/elon-musk-jason-calacanis-return-to-office-gentlemens-layoffs-twitter/

Now, there's an obvious answer to the problem of no one taking a job at the wage being offered: just increase the offer. Capitalists claim to understand this. Uber will tell you that surge pricing "incentivizes drivers" to take to the streets by offering them more money to drive during busy times:

https://www.uber.com/blog/austin/providing-rides-when-they-are-most-needed/

(Note that while Uber once handed the lion's share of surge price premiums to drivers, these days, Uber just keeps the money, because they've entered the enshittification stage where drivers are so scared of being blacklisted that Uber can push them around instead of dangling carrots.)

(Also note that this logic completely fails when it comes to other businesses, like Wendy's, who briefly promised surge-priced hamburgers during busy times, but without even the pretense that the surge premium would be used to pay additional workers to rush to the restaurant and increase the capacity:)

https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/feb/27/wendys-dynamic-surge-pricing

So bosses knew how to address their worker shortage: higher wages. You know: supply and demand. For bosses, the issue wasn't supply, it was price. A worker who earns $10/hour but makes the company $20 profit every hour is splitting the surplus 50:50 with their employer. The employer has overheads (rent on the shop, inventory, advertising and administration) that they have to pay out of their end of that surplus. But workers also have overheads: commuting costs, child-care, a professional wardrobe, and other expenses the worker incurs just so they can make money for their boss.

There's no iron law of economics that says the worker/boss split should be 50/50. Depending on the bargaining power of workers and their bosses, that split can move around a lot. Think of McDonald's and Walmart workers who work for wildly profitable corporate empires, but are so badly paid that they have to rely on food stamps. The split there is more like 10/90, in the boss's favor.

The pandemic changed the bargaining power. Sure, workers got a small cushion from stimulus checks, but they also benefited from changes in the fundamentals of the labor market. For example, millions of boomers just noped out of their jobs, forever, unwilling to risk catching a fatal illness and furious to realize that their bosses viewed that as an acceptable risk.

Bosses' willingness to risk their workers' lives backfired in another way: killing hundreds of thousands of workers and permanently disabling millions more. Combine the boomer exodus with the workers who sickened or died, and there's just fewer workers to go around, and so now those workers enjoy more bargaining power. They can demand a better split: say, 75/25, in their favor.

Remember the 2015 American Airlines strike, where pilots and flight attendants got a raise? The eminently guillotineable Citibank analyst Kevin Crissey declared: "This is frustrating. Labor is being paid first again. Shareholders get leftovers":

https://www.thestreet.com/investing/american-airlines-flight-attendants-bash-citi-analyst-who-put-shareholders-before-workers-14134309

Now, obviously, the corporation doesn't want to offer a greater share of its surplus to its workforce, but it certainly can do so. The more it pays its workers, the less profitable it will be, but that's capitalism, right? Corporations try to become as profitable as they can be, but they can't just decree that their workers must work for whatever pay they want to offer (that's serfdom).

Companies also don't get to dictate that we must buy their goods at whatever price they set (the would be a planned economy, not a market economy). There's no law that says that when the cost of making something goes up, its price should go up, too. A business that spends $10 to make a widget you pay $15 for has a $5 margin to play with. If the business's costs go up to $11, they can still charge $15 and take $1 less in profits. Or they can raise the price to $15.50 and split the difference.

But when businesses don't face competition, they can make you eat their increased costs. Take Verizon. They made $79b in profit last year, and also just imposed a $4/month service charge on their mobile customers due to "rising operational costs":

https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/1c53c4p/79bn_in_profits_last_year_but_you_need_an_extra/

Now, Verizon is very possibly lying about these rising costs. Excuseflation is rampant and rising, as one CEO told his investors, when the news is full of inflation-talk, "it’s an opportunity to increase the prices without getting a whole bunch of complaining from the customers":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/11/price-over-volume/#pepsi-pricing-power

But even stipulating that Verizon is telling the truth about these "rising costs," why should we eat those costs? There's $79b worth of surplus between Verizon's operating costs and its gross revenue. Why not take it out of Verizon's bottom line?

For 40 years, neoliberal economists have emphasized our role as "consumers" (as though consumers weren't also workers!). This let them play us off against one-another: "Sure, you don't want the person who rings up your groceries to get evicted because they can't pay their rent, but do you care about it enough to pay an extra nickel for these eggs?"

But again, there's no obvious reason why you should pay that extra nickel. If you have the buying power to hold prices down, and workers have the labor power to keep wages up, then the business has to absorb that nickel. We can have a world where workers can pay their rent and you can afford your groceries.

So how do we get bosses to agree to take less so we can have more? They've told us how: for bosses, the thing that motivates workers to show up for shitty jobs is fear – fear of losing their homes, fear of going hungry.

When your boss says, "If you don't want to do this job for minimum wage, there's someone else who will," they're telling you that the way to get a raise out of them is to engineer things so that you can say, "If you don't want to pay me a living wage for this job, there's someone else who will."

Their accusation – that you only give someone else a fair shake when you're afraid of losing out – is a confession: to get them to give you a fair shake, we have to make them afraid. They're showing us who they are, and we should believe them.

In her Daily Show appearance, FTC chair Lina Khan quipped that monopolies are too big to care:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaDTiWaYfcM

Philosophers of capitalism are forever praising its ability to transform greed into public benefit. As Adam Smith put it, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." The desire to make as much money as possible, on its own, doesn't produce our dinner, but when the butcher, the brewer and the baker are afraid that you will take your labor or your wallet elsewhere, they pay more and charge less.

Capitalists don't want market economies, where they have to compete with one another, eroding their margins and profits – they want a planned economy, like Amazon, where Party Secretary Bezos and his commissars tell merchants what they can sell and tell us what we must pay:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/01/managerial-discretion/#junk-fees

Capitalists don't want free labor, where they have to compete with rival capitalists to bid on their workers' labor – they want noncompetes, bondage fees, and "training repayment agreement provisions" (TRAPs) that force their workers to stay in dead-end jobs rather than shopping for a better wage:

\https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/04/its-a-trap/#a-little-on-the-nose

Capitalists hate capitalism, because capitalism only works if the capitalists are in a constant state of terror inspired by the knowledge that tomorrow, someone smarter could come along and open a better business, poaching their customers and workers, and putting the capitalist on the breadline.

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/18/in-extremis-veritas/#the-winnah

Being in a constant precarious state makes people lose their minds, and capitalists know it. That's why they work so hard to precaratize the rest of us, saddling us with health debt, education debt, housing debt, stagnating wages and rising prices. It's not just because that makes them more money in the short term from our interest payments and penalties. It's because it de-risks their lives: monopolies and cartels can pass on any extra costs to consumers, who'll eat shit and take it:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/02/its-the-economy-stupid/#overinflated

A workforce that goes to bed every night worrying about making the rent is a workforce that put in unpaid overtime and thank you for it.

Capitalists hate capitalism. You know who didn't hate capitalism? Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. The first chapter of The Communist Manifesto is just these two guys totally geeking out about how much cool stuff we get when capitalists are afraid and therefore productive:

https://pluralistic.net/SpectreHaunting

But when capitalists escape their fears, the alchemical reaction that converts greed to prosperity fizzles, leaving nothing behind but greed and its handmaiden, enshittification. Google search is in the toilet, getting worse every year, but rather than taking reduced margins and spending more fighting spam, the company did a $80b stock-buyback and fired 12,000 skilled technologists, rather than using that 80 bil to pay their wages for the next twenty-seven years:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/21/im-feeling-unlucky/#not-up-to-the-task

Monopoly apologists like to argue that monopolists can rake in the giant profits necessary to fund big, ambitious projects the produce better products at lower prices and make us all better off. But even if monopolists can spend their monopoly windfalls on big, ambitious projects, they don't. Why would they?

If you're Google, you can either spend tens of billions on R&D to keep up with spam and SEO scumbags, or you can spend less money buying the default search spot on every platform, so no one ever tries another search engine and switches:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/#kagi

Compared to its monopoly earnings, the tech sector's R&D spending is infinitesimal:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/08/11/nor-glom-of-nit/#capitalists-hate-competition

How do we get capitalists to work harder to make their workers and customers better off? Capitalists tell us how, every day. We need to make them afraid.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/19/make-them-afraid/#fear-is-their-mind-killer

Image: Vlad Lazarenko (modified) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wall_Street_Sign_%281-9%29.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

#pluralistic #petard #precarity #cares act #stimulus #market discipline #competition #too big to care #antitrust #labor #trustbusting #consumer welfare #every accusation is a confession

[shinobicyrus]

Obviously, the Alabama Supreme Court actually putting fetal personhood into law is another victory for creeping Christian Authoritarianism and yet another attack on health care, womens' rights, and bodily autonomy....but watching the Republicans flip their shit now that IVF clinics are in danger of closing is hilarious in a "the clown car is on fire" kind of way.

Because of course this was going to happen. Fetal personhood and anti-surrogacy (especially in the context of same-sex parents) has been bouncing around in conservative religious and legal circles (but what's the difference?) for decades, with those pesky liberals warning about it for just as long. Anyone with an inkling of awareness of the issue could have seen it coming.

So the fact that they were caught so off guard is myopic enough. And they're panicking for a very good reason, because yanno who generally goes to IVF clinics?

The people who can afford it.

Certainly the abortion bans in various states were bad, but if you had a lot of disposable income you could just...go to another state. Extremely inconvenient, yes, but not insurmountable. But this?

Oh my god, now the far-right pro-life politics that you've been cultivating for going on fifty years is now in a position to affect people with money? People that matter? Now you have to try and contend with the very extremist judges you installed that don't have to worry about getting elected and whose decisions are now putting you on the political chopping block?

Join us the in misery you're created for everyone else, assholes.

#Oh no my own petard! #IVF #Fetal Personhood #Alabama Supreme Court #Politics #Republics #in vitro fertilization #Women's healthcare #Abortion #For real tho? #Watching Senator #Tommy Tuberville #stammer between the pro-life buzzwords and saying ''we believe people have to have more children'' #(which...interesting. Which people do you think should have more children and why?) #and the inherent contradiction of pro-life politics outlawing fertility clinics - places that HELP PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN #because guess what assholes? Pro-Choice goes BOTH WAYS #helping with things like FAMILY PLANNING to people who want and are prepared for children #why...it's almost like dismantling healthcare and taking away people's ability to make decisions about their lives and bodies and families #is...bad?

[natjennie]

your own petard has gotta be the most common thing to be hoisted by

#i LOOOOVEEEEE the phrase hoisted by your own petard #anyway.

[caluski]

Nephew keeps confusing words for "mustard" and "firework" (musztarda/petarda) but i love him nonetheless

#Context: he's 2 years old #Google translate suggests English language does use the word 'petard' but i am not sure if i can trust it bc i don't think #I've ever seen people online use it. Only petarda in polish. Doesn't matter #pogaduchy

[ssaalexblake]

I do kind of want to watch Gatwa as the doctor but like, after years of dealing with fandom bullshit over 13 and the utter shitpile of fandom, I just can't be bothered to do it again here. I know what y'all gonna be like. He's never gonna be good Enough he's never gonna do it quite right and you're never going to manage to explain why because all logic is going to fall apart if you try and explain because it won't be logical, like it wasn't with 13. And the majority of you won't even Realise your own bias. And I cannot be goddamn assed to sit and stew in that cesspit anymore.

Dw fandom is terrible hours and I can only delude myself into thinking my circle is the only part of it for So long before I want to say fuck that and leave for less shit pastures.

#dw shit #and the showrunner is Not gonna help if what I'm reading is on the level here #tho will be super funny if rtd gets hoisted by his own petard here and gets super pissed abt #fan reactions when he himself has done everything possible to make this transition as #bumpy and temultuous as possible #you can act like casting variance has no affect on fan reactions but that's naive and dangerous #account for societal bullshit to Start with #Don't do shit that'll make it worse

[chimerqa]

Szczęśliwego nowego roku! Spełnienia marzeń.

#sylwester #nowy rok #bla bla bla #zimne ognie zamiast petard #Szczytna