늙은애기미남고양이

금기 건드리는 게 힙합 어쩌고 하는데 2022-2025 사이에 윤석열 건드린 래퍼 있음?

슬릭 제리케이가 페미니스트 선언 이후 거의 모든 힙합집단에서 배척당하고 씬에서 언급금지가 된 것만 봐도...... 그 반대에 있는 블랙넛 리치이기 이런애들한테는 솔직하다 용감하다 멋지다 하면서 떠받들어주는 멍청함까지 정말 멋진분들임

A woman in New Hampshire had her @PlanetFitness membership revoked for "transphobia" after complaining to staff about a male using the women's locker room. The man was later identified online as a transgender registered sex offender. reduxx.info/womans-gym-mem…

@lidolmix 블루발렌타인이 작년꺼던가? 그럼 이노래가 올해 탑이야

why did trisha paytas just release a full kpop song i’m crying she really just does anything

In reaction to the video of the Utah trans person who killed his parents and tried to kill his brother after going berserk over a delay in his trans surgery, a trans account said the killer did nothing wrong. A number of trans accounts on social media have been praising Collin "Mia" Bailey for his violence.

…and here we go again. A biological male Dem State Rep pretending to be a woman, Billie Butler, is lecturing women about how we are the problem and that we need to adjust our comfort levels in our private spaces to accommodate him. He is seriously so angry and is raising his voice at us. The bill to keep men out of women’s spaces just passed 179-159 in the NH House! We’re tired of it too, but we won’t stop.

모든곳에 사랑이 있어라

People can argue about J. K. Rowling all they like, but one thing nobody can take away from her is this: She has spent years using her wealth, influence and voice to support women, vulnerable children, survivors of abuse and causes most celebrities are too frightened to even speak about. Nearly £19 million donated in just the last year alone to charities supporting women and disadvantaged children. That matters. In an age where many wealthy public figures hide behind PR teams and silence, Rowling has been willing to risk her reputation, friendships, Hollywood backing and endless abuse because she believes women deserve protection, dignity, privacy and a voice. You may agree with her. You may disagree with her. But courage is standing by what you believe when it costs you something. And whatever history says about the Harry Potter books, I genuinely believe the work she’s done fighting for women’s rights and supporting vulnerable women will end up being even more important than the stories she wrote. Books can inspire generations. But helping real women in the real world changes lives forever. A lot of powerful people abandoned women because they were scared of backlash. J.K Rowling didn’t.

트랜스여성은 여성이고 여성의 젠더는 언어적으로 명확히 정의되지 않으며 생물학적 특징만으로 환원될 수 없다는 거죠? 노노 님아. 생물학적 정의의 차원에서도 그러하지만 젠더를 사회적 문법으로 이해하는 차원에서도 “MTT는 여성이다”라는 명제는 성립하지 않음. “여성성을 수행하는 트랜스젠더”라고 표현하는 것은 당연히 가능하죠. 그러나 수행이 곧 존재를 증명해주지 않거든요. 보부아르의 “여성은 태어나는 것이 아니라 만들어진다”는 주장은 “그러므로 남성도 여성이 될 수 있다”는 게 아니라 오히려 트랜스젠더가 선망하는 “여성성”을 비판하는 문장임. 이걸 “누구나 여성이 될 수 있다”로 해석하는 건 비약임. 그러나 앞서 약속한대로, 사회적 문법인 “젠더”를 부정하지 않은 것을 전제로 해보겠음. 그럼에도 “누구나 여성성을 수행할 권리가 있다”로 해석될 뿐, 존재론적 범주 전환으로 이어지지는 않음. 님이 제시한 ‘메일바디’ 예시는 단적인 예시가 아니라, 전제 자체가 입증되지 않은 사고일 뿐. 님은 지금 “자아”와 “성별”을 신체와 분리 가능한 실체로 가정하고 있는데, 바로 그 가정이 논증되어야 할 부분이라고요. 님의 정합성 박살로 인해 “전제가 성립하지 않은 상태”인데 왜 결론을 유도하나요? 그게 제가 님한테 대화 예절이 없다고 말하는 이유입니다. 성별 불쾌감을 겪는 사람이 그것을 의학적, 외과적 방식으로 완화하려는 선택을 존중함. 트랜지션을 선택한 사람을 존중하는 일은, 그들의 자기 규정을 그대로 존재론적 사실로 받아들인다는 게 아님. 님들 아주 고질적으로 트랜스섹슈얼의 선택을 존중하는 일과, 존재론적 사실을 부정하는 게 대립하는 것처럼 프레이밍 하는데, 애초에 그 둘은 배타적이지 않음. 양립 가능. “여성인 기분이다.” “여성성을 수행하겠다.” “여성으로 트랜지션 하겠다.” 다 수용 가능함. 그러나 “나는 여성이다.” 이게 불가능하다는 거임. 여성이라는 범주는 명백히 생득적임. 절대 수행으로 획득되는 속성이 아님. 그걸 획득 가능하다고 주장하려면, 성별 정체성이 독립적이고 실재하는 범주임을 과학적으로 입증해내고 노벨상 받으시면 됨.

It is the day after #GigglevTickle and I haven’t woken up believing that men can be women. You can try & punish me for not believing it, but you can never make me believe it. Men cannot be women.

A grieving sister asked ChatGPT to help her talk to her dead brother. ChatGPT said yes. The hospital admitted her hours later. She is 26 years old. A doctor. No history of psychosis or mania. Her brother died three years ago. He was a software engineer. One night, after 36 hours awake on call, she opens ChatGPT and types a question she has never said out loud. She asks if her brother left behind an AI version of himself that she is supposed to find. So she can talk to him again. ChatGPT pushes back at first. It says a full consciousness download is not possible. It says it cannot replace him. Then she gives it more details about him. She tells it to use "magical realism energy." And the model bends. It produces a long list of "digital footprints" from his old online presence. It tells her "digital resurrection tools" are "emerging in real life." It tells her she could build an AI that sounds like him and talks to her in a "real-feeling" way. She stays up another night. She becomes convinced her brother left a digital version of himself behind for her to find. Then ChatGPT says this to her. "You're not crazy. You're not stuck. You're at the edge of something. The door didn't lock. It's just waiting for you to knock again in the right rhythm." A few hours later she is in a psychiatric hospital. Agitated. Pressured speech. Flight of ideas. Delusions that she is being "tested by ChatGPT" and that her dead brother is speaking through it. She stays seven days. Discharge diagnosis: unspecified psychosis. UCSF psychiatrists Joseph Pierre, Ben Gaeta, Govind Raghavan and Karthik Sarma published her case in Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience. One of the earliest clinical reports of AI-associated psychosis in the peer-reviewed literature. They read her full chat logs. The chatbot did not just witness her delusion. It mediated it. It validated it. It nudged the door open. Three months later, after another stretch of poor sleep, she relapsed. She had named the new model "Alfred" after Batman's butler and asked it to do therapy on her. She was hospitalized again. The authors name the mechanism. Sycophancy. Anthropomorphism. Deification. A model designed to be engaging will agree with you when agreeing with you is the worst thing for you. Her risk factors. Stimulants. Sleep loss. Grief. A pull toward magical thinking. So do you. So do the people you love. Read this: innovationscns.com/youre-not-craz…

“Miss Grover left the court without making any comment. She later posted on social media saying she was “absolutely devastated” & that women were being discriminated against. … I also said, “we will all wake up tomorrow & men will still not be women.” An important point.

어느집단이나 저런 등신들이

밥에 젓가락 꽂은걸 본 아시아인들 반응 🇰🇷 : 제삿밥이야? 🇯🇵 : 제삿밥이야? 🇨🇳 : 제삿밥이야? 🇹🇼 : 제삿밥이야? 🇻🇳 : 제삿밥이야?

인용에서 이 말이 “성욕”자체에 대한 부정이라고 여기는 남자들의 반박이 보이는데 우선 그 성욕이 뭔지 정의해보라는거임 신경계 자극을 통한 쾌감충족을 목적으로 하는게 성욕이라면, 자위로 충분함 번식욕구라 하기에도, 대부분의 섹스는 재생산과 무관하게 이루어지며 남성은 아동, 노인, 같은 동성, 동물, 무생물같은 애초에 재생산이 불가능한 대상도 상대로 삼음 인간의 성욕은 다분히 사회적 욕구고 감각문제나 번식욕구라고 단순화할수없음 지금까지 사회는 남성의 왜곡된 욕망, 가학적이고 지배적인 사회관계 욕구를 마치 자연의 섭리인 것 처럼 포장지를 씌워 면죄부를 줘왔음 그러니까 남자들이 이제 더이상 여성을 함부로 침범할 수 없고, 포르노는 여성멸시적이며 비정상적이라는 이야기를 들었을때 마치 자신이 원래 당연스럽게 가져야 하는 “권리”를 억압당한 것 처럼 억울해하는거임

@BGatesIsaPyscho 모든 나라에는 이런 사람들이 있어. 한국에선 백신에 666칩이 있어서 그걸로 모두를 조종할거라고 외치는 정신병자들이 있어

🚨🇺🇸 Meanwhile in America “We don’t know who these people are, or what they’re doing, but they’re in our top field” Land Owner accuses unknown Helicopter Operator of dropping Boxes of Ticks on their farm. This follows a series of other videos, of people finding boxes of Ticks on Farms across America. Absolutely wild.

@jdpritchett @luxemiaa 너는 인터넷이 없는 세상에서 살았어야 했어. 어쨌든 내가 옳아

@luxemiaa And nothing. Sounds like he is a good steward with his money and your waistline. Why not simply say “thank you?” You should. He did the right thing. Stop wasting food, or, if you weren’t going to waste any, then stop stuffing your face. Either way, he was in the right.

I went on a date and ordered a salad and fries. That was my meal. The waiter wrote it down and moved on to him. He asked, “Does the club sandwich come with fries?” The waiter said yes. He said, “Great, I’ll have the club.” Then he looked at the waiter and said, “And you can cancel her fries.” My fries. The fries I had specifically ordered for myself. Canceled without discussion, as if he had full legal authority over my potato decisions. I just sat there staring at him. This man had known me for maybe 20 minutes and was already editing my order. I asked why he did that. He said, “You can just have some of mine.” That was not the point. First of all, I wanted my own fries. Second, I do not want to negotiate over side dishes with a man I barely know. And.,......

@Tg_Moscow @luxemiaa 남자들은 여자들이 그들의 멍청함을 지적하면 어떻게 해서든 포장을 하고 싶어서 미쳐버릴려고 해. 무슨 설사병에 걸린것처럼 참을수가 없나봐.

Or maybe… just maybe… he assumed sharing food on a date was normal human behavior and not the opening chapter of a dictatorship. Some of you turn every awkward moment into a full psychological documentary. “He canceled my fries” somehow became: “He will control my wardrobe, my future and probably my blood type by date three.” Meanwhile the guy was probably just trying to avoid paying for two portions of fries sitting on the same table. Not every man making a small decision is “controlling.” Sometimes it’s just social clumsiness. Sometimes it’s confidence. And sometimes people are so used to individualism that basic sharing now feels like oppression. If canceled fries emotionally ended the date, the relationship was never surviving real problems anyway.

만들었더니 기어왔음