unicorn

If you wish to support an organization which helps members of the LGBTQ+ community escape hostile countries, this is an effective organization: https://www.rainbowrailroad.org/ They are rated 4* on Charity Navigator: https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/474896980

Last night I just watch Hot Frosty, in which a snowman comes to life to charm a young widow. The man who stars as the erotic snowman, Dustin Milligan, is incredibly hot. He almost had me spontaneously exploding. Despite the wintery setting, the "snowman" loves the cold, so he's shirtless for half of the movie. The movie also has 88% on rotten tomatoes, but with a body like that, who cares? Interestingly, the actor who plays the hot frosty comes from one of the coldest cities on the planet, Yellowknife (NWT). In January, the mean daily MAXIMUM is -25.5C. Talk about frosty! I can't imagine what I wouldn't give to have my way with this hot 39 year-old!

Well, one cannot condone antisemitism, hate, or violence. That being said, many Israeli fans clearly tried to provoke the Palestinians and other Arabs, and they succeeded: https://apnews.com/article/maccabi-tel-aviv-amsterdam-violence-protests-palestinian-bcea212281f682098c4c77ef552af5f1 "...Tensions had been brewing in Amsterdam for days ahead of the match. A Palestinian flag was torn down from a building in Amsterdam on Wednesday, Dutch broadcaster NOS reported, and authorities banned a pro-Palestinian demonstration near the stadium. Ahead of the game, large crowds of supporters of the Israeli team could be seen on video chanting anti-Arab slogans as they headed to the stadium, escorted by police. “Let the IDF win, and fuck the Arabs,” the fans chanted, using the acronym of the Israeli military, as they shook their fists. It also showed police pushing several pro-Palestinian protesters away from a Maccabi fan gathering in a square earlier in the day...". Do the provocations justify violence? No. However, the consequences of anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian slurs and actions could easily be predicted. Most of the 2 million people in Gaza are not Hamas fighters, but rather innocent bystanders. The Israeli fans not only showed a complete lack of empathy and tact, but actually made fun of the innocent civilians. As Hamas figured out, provocations often lead to consequences.

for....?

One cannot condone anti-Semitism in any form, and recent blurbs on the press are quick to show the horrors of anti-Semitism in recent events related to soccer matches in Amsterdam. Hidden in the depths of these stories (not reported on the TV or radio, but located deep in the depth of some printed news stories), one also sees the flip side. https://apnews.com/article/maccabi-tel-aviv-amsterdam-violence-protests-palestinian-bcea212281f682098c4c77ef552af5f1 "...Ahead of the game, large crowds of supporters of the Israeli team could be seen on video chanting anti-Arab slogans as they headed to the stadium, escorted by police. “Let the IDF win, and (expletive) the Arabs,” the fans chanted, using the acronym of the Israeli military, as they shook their fists. It also showed police pushing several pro-Palestinian protesters away from a Maccabi fan gathering in a square earlier in the day...". While this does not excuse any violence, of course, it seems the height of hypocrisy to be wailing at the results of a response to one's own racist baiting. How could anyone be surprised at the results of these taunts which were not just racist themselves, but tone-deaf to the suffering of innocent Palestinians. Once again, racist taunts don't justify violence. However, the outcome shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone. If I went to a bar frequented by any demographic group, and proceeded to chant slogans making fun of that bar's demographic, I could predict the result (even if battery is still illegal).

Aside from the fact that she was nominated too late, and that Biden should have handed the torch sooner, I don't think she was forceful enough in countering the ridiculous notion that the economy would end up in better shape under Trump, nor in highlighting the economic successes under Biden. Poll after poll showed that the #1 concern for voters was the economy, and poll after poll showed that the majority of the public believed Trump's lies that (a) the economy was in bad shape, and (b) things would be better under his leadership. The truth of the matter, of course, is that, after inheriting a terrible economy as well as the inevitable rise in inflation due to China's disastrous "zero-Covid" policies, with its attendant supply-chain issues, the economy rebounded tremendously into one of the best on the planet, with full employment, low inflation, lowering interest rates, and a booming stock market. Trump has been mostly quiet about what he'll do, relying mostly on BS platitudes. Of the two things he said he'd do, substantially raising tarifs, and mass deportations, if he's successful in doing them, both will obviously have a devastating effect on inflation and business profits. It's absolutely axiomatic that raising the costs of imports will lead to price increases and hurt businesses' bottom lines. And, of course, getting rid of cheap foreign labor in the food industry and elsewhere will also inevitably lead to price increases as well (especially for food). Yet Trump succeeded in convincing people that inflation was increasing under Biden, which is the opposite of the truth. Instead of simply pushing the message that Trump is unfit for office (which he is), the Democrats needed to address the voters' #1 concern, the economy, and point out that things would be better under the Democrats (which it would have been). For decades, the US economy has always done better under Democratic leadership than under GOP leadership. The Democrats failed to get that message out. I also wonder whether it was wise to blast voters' phones with frequent daily texts. It certainly pissed me off. Since I don't live in a swing state, this harassment even made me consider not voting for any candidate.

That's an irrational reaction, unless your sister-in-law is truly talking about minors when she says "boys" (hopefully not the case). When she vacations in Bali, does she believe that hotel workers, waiters, taxi drivers, etc., are volunteering their time for the pleasure of serving her? Or does she understand that she's providing the locals with employment, doing something they wouldn't otherwise be doing, so that these people can support themselves and their families (if they have any)? Except for the extremely rare hermit living off of the land, we all "use" each other, each doing our own jobs, so that we can enjoy our lives to the extent that we can. The next time you hear someone say something like that, inform the person that you do not hire minors, but rather mentally competent (i.e. not drugged) adults who are making informed choices about how they want to earn their living. We all hire others for work, in one form or another. Financial compensation for work performed does not constitute undue coercion.

Well, I've never come out of the blue to tell people I like younger men, but these things come up in normal conversation, and I always answer honestly. Of course, since I'm now married to a man in his early 30s, it's pretty obvious, but friends, family, and co-workers normally ask about what's going on in our lives, and I've never made up fake stories. I would never blurt out "I'm taking a vacation to XXX to pick up younger men," but everyone at work (and family and friends) would know I'd be going on vacation, and I wouldn't hide where I was going. I might show photos of men I was dating, but never of some dude I hired.

The massive difference, of course, is that those in power in the US don't murder journalists who disagree with them. At least so far. We'll have to see what happens if Trump wins the election.

You'll get no argument from me regarding the rationality of monarchies in today's world. I would agree with the sentiment that monarchies our outdated in the 21st century. That being said, the intention of the royal couple was clearly to provide moral support and commiserate with their people. There was certainly no intention to make fun of those suffering. If they wanted to show disapproval of the response, it would be more appropriate to address such disapproval at those in authority for coordinating said response. This reminds me of the Spanish hospitality shown to innocent tourists in Barcelona who were just trying to enjoy a meal. Instead of working on real solutions, such as changing laws on short-term-rentals, cruise ship docking fees and regulations, affordable housing, and so on, many locals took their frustrations on people who obviously had no decision-making capacity on the situation. How would they like to be treated that way when they traveled? (Or should one presume these yokels are too closed-minded to travel?) Regulations can work. My husband and I were scheduled to take a cruise ship from Barcelona in early May, but this was switched to Tarragona due to new regulations. Taking out one's frustrations on innocent people is not the right thing to do.

That's an absurdly short list. The list of journalists alone is many times greater than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia And it dwarfs the long list of other Putin critics he's murdered: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_notable_Russians_in_2022–2024

The King and Queen of Spain went to flood-stricken areas of their kingdom to show support. They ended up being pelted with mud by the locals. Maybe they're as dumb as Trump supporters, believing the royals control the weather? https://apnews.com/article/spain-floods-king-protest-mud-a8525bd82cf4cc3fc6273d535cbb9d66 "...Queen Letizia broke into tears sympathetically after speaking to several people, including one woman who wept in her arms. Later, one of the queen’s bodyguards had a bloody wound on his forehead and there was a hole in the back window of the prime minister’s official car. But even after being forced to seek protection, King Felipe VI, with flecks of mud on his face, remained calm and made several efforts to speak to individual residents. He insisted on trying to speak with people as he tried to continue his visit. He spoke to several people, patting two young men on their backs and sharing a quick embrace, with mud stains on his black raincoat...".

Well, it does have jurisdiction, though obviously no enforcement powers of its own over a permanent member of the security council.

The ICJ case is ongoing, however, "On 16 March 2022, the court ruled 13–2 that Russia must "immediately suspend the military operations" it commenced on 24 February 2022 in Ukraine, with Vice-President Kirill Gevorgian of Russia and Judge Xue Hanqin of China dissenting."

The US has yet to celebrate its semiquincentennial (though it's coming soon).

I feel a song coming on 😄

I'd send the book to his parents if I thought it'd help. I've noted this among some of my friends. Either the parents reject their children or their faith's teachings. Some faiths have some leeway, but others, such as Mormonism, are quite inflexible: either you shun your child or leave the church. I know one LDS couple, for example. One parent is supportive, and left the church, the other has no contact with her son. Churches which are maladaptive will lose membership. Since we came back from the Galápagos, I'm reminded of one of Darwin's truisms: The trend is especially evident in Western countries, such as France: Spain: Germany:

I'm not sure how this relates to my hubbie. His family knew he's gay and "accepted" him only on the condition that he never spoke of it. That doesn't seem like real acceptance to me. One doesn't have to agree with the way a person is or what he believes to accept them. They literally believe Bible stories about the earth being created in 6 days, Noah's arc, and Jonah and the whale. I went to a couple of his cousins' weddings, and thought their talk of one spouse being "God's choice" for the other to be ridiculous. While I personally find their beliefs inane and preposterous, I can respect their differences in belief. I certainly have never challenged their beliefs, much less voiced an opinion that a marriage wasn't "God's plan," unlike members of his family. For what it's worth, my hubbie said he's never been happier, and it shows.

Isn't faith wonderful? I feel a song coming on.

I thank God 😉that I was brought up in an atheist family, but the opposite was true of my husband, who's also atheist but brought up in a highly religious family. They kicked him out when he was 18, and only one set of grandparents supported him (to an extent). Almost none of his family attended our wedding, other than some 2nd/3rd cousins and one first cousin. One added to the decline that marrying a man was not "God's will." Only the grandparents and one cousin had a legitimate excuse (the grandparents said they'd have come were it not for recent knee surgery, and one first cousin was undergoing chemotherapy). Well, one brother stated he had a midterm 2 days after our ceremony (veterinary school), though it was certainly very early in the semester to be having a midterm, and I personally don't believe it. For our honeymoon, we enjoyed a luxury cruise in the Galápagos. All of the guests in the dining room clapped and sang to us the Mexican song "Cielito Lindo" to celebrate our honeymoon, waving their napkins around their heads in the air. We've both enjoyed that campy movie Mommie Dearest, and after seeing the entire complement of guests and crew celebrate our wedding, I told him that the scene reminded me of when Joanne Crawford asked her daughter why her own daughter couldn't give her the same respect given to her by any random people on the street: Well, my husband was not about to strangle his mother, but he told me that she texted him (after the honeymoon) and wished to communicate with him again (he stopped all communication with those who refused to come to the wedding). He said he texted her back and said that she would remain incommunicado until she apologized on social media and sent him the same amount of $$ she spent on any of her other children's weddings. I advised him not to hold his breath. I doubt that day will ever come. It's difficult for me to put myself in his shoes, since my family background was polar opposite, with both parents having scientific doctoral degrees, and eminent scientific careers. I'm curious if any members here came from families with religious/disapproving backgrounds, and how you may have dealt with that.

I find it a bit silly to be "debating" this issue. Sadly, it looks as though Trump will probably win. Smooth talking by a lifelong con-man will probably win over facts. I'm moving some of my assets over from stocks to bonds, since Trump's tariff frenzy will probably cause a downturn in the great economy which Biden has left us with, despite what he inherited. But this is purely a matter of informed speculation, not of opinion, so there doesn't seem to be much sense in arguing. If one actually wants to be productive about it, one could help the campaign. Criticizing someone's predictions seems pointless.