
GreyWolfLord |

This seems like one of those weird side effect things.
I'm surprised I hadn't seen what it could be used for before, and a scary precedent it could set.
I agree that the entire disregard for Federal law by Colorado and states that legalized Marijuana has set a rather ironic precedent on who takes priority in regulations, state or federal laws.
In many ways, it's giving the Federal govt. the finger.
A side effect though, is to see how far this could be pushed. How much jurisdiction and leeway will a state be able to push against Federal Regulations and Federal rulings?
This could be a WHOLE SLEW of side effects of this that go FAAAR beyond the marijuana, and even much further than the entire Gay Marriage debate.
Thus far the Feds try to enforce things with money. You don't follow Federal regulations, you don't get money. What happens when a state simply says (like CO)...we don't care about that pot of gold...we're going to do this whether you like it or not?
It could eventually affect interstate commerce, transportation, and myriads of other things depending on how far people push it.
In some ways it IS more constitutional...going back to where states had FAR more jurisdiction on what went on in their borders.
A LOT of this was done away with in the Civil War (that's 150 years worth of history there) where it was shown that states do NOT have the rights to govern over Federal laws and that the Federal government has the power to force them to obey Federal laws and regulations. (Actually, it didn't really exist prior to the Civil War, but the Civil War changed that and strengthened the power that the Federal Govt. held).
With these actions of states defying the Federal government in such a simple way, paves a dangerous path where we could unintentionally see people trying to undo 150 years of history towards a time where a more chaotic and argumentative (you think it's bad now...wait and see what happens if we allow something like this to occur) US existed.
It all boils down to that adage which was basically resolved 150 years ago, and then reinforced and bolted down around 50 years ago (during the Civil Rights movement of the 60s and early 70s) which is more proper, state rights or Federal rights.
This move with marijuana, and if it is used for precedence in other arenas...would seem to be a move in the opposite direction where people are pushing for a stronger state rights than Federal Rights.
This isn't just a dangerous type movement, it's deadly because last time this really came to the forefront of politics it ended up with a Civil War.

Kryzbyn |

Kryzbyn wrote:Bob_Loblaw wrote:Kryzbyn wrote:I didn't mean in the history of ever, sorry. More like last 10-20 years. Is this still a concern? Why wouldn't their licenses to practice be subject to revocation?Here's Mississippi less than a year ago. Quote from the article: "I thought great, I am the only baker in Jackson that does wedding cakes."
There are laws like this being introduced in several states. Most of those states have large rural areas so there is often only one or two similar businesses in town.
Here's some examples of people being denied healthcare based on religious beliefs.
These are nearly all less than 10 years old.
The first link is about having to legislate a freedom business owners should have anyway. It's stupid. Luckily, it looks like a lot of the other business owners won't have any of it. Good on them.
The second link is abhorrent. I don;t know what the medication was, but if it was necessary for existence, then his medical license should be revoked. Like, now.
The third, is sad. Until people take the time to learn about transgendered people, ignorance will prevail.Is "necessary for existence" the dividing criteria?
If not, where do you draw the line?
Can apartment complexes choose not to rent to gay couples?
Can brokers steer gay couples away from certain parts of town? Can banks steer them to worse mortgage terms? Both done on a wide scale to blacks for decades, up through the last housing boom at least.
Yeah, I think that's a good point. No one can deny you, say diabetes medication, or other things necessary to live, but a cake? Sure.
That being said I don't have all the answers. If legislation is really necessary to get people to stop being dicks, then I guess that's what will need to happen. I just won't like it, and lament that it's necessary.
thejeff |
Yeah, I think that's a good point. No one can deny you, say diabetes medication, or other things necessary to live, but a cake? Sure.
That being said I don't have all the answers. If legislation is really necessary to get people to stop being dicks, then I guess that's what will need to happen. I just won't like it, and lament that it's necessary.
There's a very fine line to be drawn somewhere in between immediate life-saving medical treatment and a wedding cake,
And legislation has never stopped people from being dicks and it never will. It just spares the targets some of the consequences.

KSF |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

It looks like the latest issue of Marvel's "Angela: Asgard's Assassin," reveals that her traveling companion, Sera, is a trans woman.
This is Sera. (That's not where we learn about her. She tells her backstory later in this issue.)
Issue #3, which came out this week.

TerminalArtiste |

And confirmation from writer Kieron Gillen that Sera is trans right here.
And on tumblr.
(And when someone points out he forgot Tong.)
Cool! Trans representation ftw!
Notice for literary representation: the eponymous protag of Lilith Saintcrow's 'Dante Valentine' novels is apparently bisexual/pansexual (she mentions romantic relations w/ both a guy and a girl, but doesn't explicitly self-ID in book one.) I'm most of the way through book one, Working for the Devil and it's very good.
Genre-wise, they're sorta post-apocalyptic action, featuring psychics of many different stripes, demons, and assorted other supernatural stuff.
That romance with the girl becomes a 'Bury Your Gays' instance.

GreyWolfLord |

On the trans front, if you support it AT ALL, you need to watch Jupiter Rising if you can.
It's not that the film itself has anything to do with it, but the Wachowski's do, and ever since one become more like herself, it seems as if their movies have been panned and avoided.
I for one am enthusiastic about Jupiter Rising, and hope that it does better than what many are saying now days. They say it's dropped to an expected 18 mil weekend, I'm hoping that it can beat it by spades. I am saddened that thus far what appears to be a great movie isn't being seen by many.
If nothing else hopefully word of mouth can spur on support of one of the few OPENLY Transgender individuals in Hollywood.
Just my few thoughts on it.

Freehold DM |

Hm. Last I heard the movie was battlefield earth levels of bad. The last wachowski movie I know of was speed racer, and that was laughed out of theatres. I think they just make bad movies, regardless of their trans/cis status. Also, the controversy regarding the matrix(and to be fair, terminator) has NOT been forgotten in the circles that would have gone to see this movie.

GreyWolfLord |

Hm. Last I heard the movie was battlefield earth levels of bad. The last wachowski movie I know of was speed racer, and that was laughed out of theatres. I think they just make bad movies, regardless of their trans/cis status. Also, the controversy regarding the matrix(and to be fair, terminator) has NOT been forgotten in the circles that would have gone to see this movie.
I actually loved Speed Racer myself. Didn't know about terminator controversy regarding them, I'll have to look it up.
I think they make great movies, personally speaking, maybe I'm just hugely biased.

MagusJanus |

Hm. Last I heard the movie was battlefield earth levels of bad. The last wachowski movie I know of was speed racer, and that was laughed out of theatres. I think they just make bad movies, regardless of their trans/cis status. Also, the controversy regarding the matrix(and to be fair, terminator) has NOT been forgotten in the circles that would have gone to see this movie.
Which Terminator controversy? I know that 4 had a number of them.

Drejk |

Anna Grodzka, the sole Polish transgendered parliment memeber was recently subject of a rather ridiculous article in right wing magazine. Including claims that the gender change was a Public Relations scam (incredebilously dumb claim in Poland where gender and sexual awareness is close to nil and being non-heteronormative is a real social disadvantage), that she lives with her female political assistant (assistant lives in her own house, twinned with Grodzka's, with her husband).
Her later comment in a interview for a different medium:
Grodzka:And it seems to me that people are not required to know everything, and learning the base facts regarding things he writes of is primarily the journalist's duty. This is called honest journalism - a profession that is dying in our country. Investigative journalist "wSieci" pushed their own readers plenty of lies and ignorance, actually we can say that he insulted them treating like idiots.

![]() |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |

I had an interesting chat with my mom who is a psych nurse. They seem to have a suddenly large trans population on her pediatric unit. I tried to give her some useful info based on so many of your stories (particularly understanding the idea that trams encompasses many identities, including gender-nonconformity and so on). The outcome was that she realized there is a lot to learn, and it looks like they will be bringing somebody in to better educate the staff on gender identity matters.

Jessica Price Project Manager |
7 people marked this as a favorite. |

OMG JUPITER ASCENDING.
It's like someone interviewed 12-year-old me about my daydreams and then made a super-expensive cheesy scifi movie out of them.
Minor spoilers:
I mean, if she'd had the coolest, sister-of-the-heart best friend, that would have completed it.
Also! Spaceship design inspired by gothic cathedrals! Eddie Redmayne wearing rococo wing-sleeves and whispering vaguely incestuous-sounding villainous things at everyone. And Sean Bean and Channing Tatum punching each other soulfully while they talk about their feelings!
Channing Tatum was shirtless for, like, most of the movie, so they also listened to 16-year-old me.
It's a perfectly serviceable space opera. Like, better than most attempts at making space opera.
It's also a terrible script that everyone dives into with all the heart and earnestness in the world and it's gloriously, utterly, ****ing insane.
Or, here: this review about sums it up.
Or this.

Drejk |

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:Exactly. If you take it seriously, you're doing it wrong. Just enjoy the pretty and the ZOMG action and the main villain's gratuitous scenery chewing.And let's not forget Sean Bean playing Sean Bean like no one else can. OSCAR TIME.
I'll expect him to be dead around 1/4th-1/3rd of the movie then.

Jessica Price Project Manager |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

So, when you're saying terrible script + don't take it seriously + it's enjoyable, do you mean in a "so bad it's good way" like the dungeons & dragons movie, or "silly but fun" like the Thor movie?
More like the Thor movie, but it's not trying at all to be humorous (which doesn't mean parts of it aren't).
There are cringe-inducing lines, but the movie is so delighted with all the stuff that it's going to show you. There is zero cynicism in this movie.

Paladin of Baha-who? |

I disagree, the bureacracy scenes were clearly played for laughs.
It's got some 'so bad it's good' moments, and it also has silly but fun moments. There is also a lot of 'so baddass I won't pay attention to the plot holes' moments.
It also passes the Bechdel test, the main character is an undocumented immigrant from eastern europe in a menial job, and it has scenes and crucial plot points that emphasize that women's lives matter. This is unfortunately balanced out by the main character being a damsel in distress repeatedly, and is fought over by powerful men with little agency of her own.

Jessica Price Project Manager |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |

Fair. Forgot about those. :-)
I'm not sure I'd call her a damsel in distress, though, or say she doesn't have agency. She's plausible as an early-20s woman who's suddenly thrust into a disorienting mess where everyone's trying to kill her.
She's not Black Widow, trained to be a badass, and she's not a superhero with magical powers (bees notwithstanding), she's a member of a human royal family, and Channing Tatum spends a lot of time saving her from physical peril because he's her bodyguard. When it comes to the non-physical peril, though, despite the attempts of everyone to push her around, she repeatedly exerts her own will as soon as she's had a moment to understand the situation. She does what she can to protect herself and her family, whether it's alliance marriages or bargaining, and even physically, she does what practically no woman in movies or tv ever does while someone is trying to strangle them, which is knee them in the balls. (As far as it just being powerful men fighting over her, the first figure to make a power grab for her is Kalique.)
And at the end, she makes the choice to live where she wants, how she wants, with whom she wants.
I get frustrated with the idea that you have to be a physical badass or you're a damsel in distress.

KSF |

I had an interesting chat with my mom who is a psych nurse. They seem to have a suddenly large trans population on her pediatric unit. I tried to give her some useful info based on so many of your stories (particularly understanding the idea that trams encompasses many identities, including gender-nonconformity and so on). The outcome was that she realized there is a lot to learn, and it looks like they will be bringing somebody in to better educate the staff on gender identity matters.
Good on ya.

Sissyl |

They don't work in Kansas anymore? ...sorry...
I don't know what to say, except a mixture of beating my head against the wall and a deeply felt sigh. I guess it's to be expected that some would push back in the spread of tolerance. There's always been some people like that. Hopefully it will get challenged, no?

thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, that's fairly disgusting. Of course, there's no way that can be dressed up as anything but naked prejudice.
Well, it's likely pandering to prejudice as much as actual prejudice, but that's almost worse.
Of course, it is being dressed up as something other than naked prejudice. Supposedly while he approves of the policy, he thinks it should be set by the legislature, not by executive order. Because obviously it's bad for state government to actually have a hiring policy.
In a way he's right. It would be much better to have a non-discrimination policy as law rather than just an executive order. But that's so that a%%&$#+s like him can't change it on a whim.

thejeff |
thejeff wrote:Supposedly while he approves of the policy, he thinks it should be set by the legislature, not by executive order.So, a supporter would then revoke said executive order because it should have been imposed by the legislature instead? Naturally.
I didn't say it wasn't a skimpy costume.

Pillbug Toenibbler |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:Sam Brownback in a diaphanous, skimpy costume is not an image I needed in my head, thank you very much!changes pobw's screensaver to Sam Brownback in a diaphanous, skimpy costume
Well, in Whoville they say — that the Freehold's alignment grew three notches eviler that day.