I’m pretty sure most people can manage a walk in the country without ripping foxes limb from limb by ‘accident’
I’m pretty sure most people can manage a walk in the country without ripping foxes limb from limb by ‘accident’
Another reminder that elections are not the same thing as democracy
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
Another reminder that elections are not the same thing as democracy
www.theguardian.com/world/2025/d...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
www.wheresyoured.at/premium-how-...
Let’s be very clear here. This is exactly why it was exceptionally unwise of the Supreme Court to wade into this space using ‘biological sex’ as a defining concept, because as soon as you talk to actual biologists the simple binary unravels. Not a stable basis for law.
If you support trans rights, like, comment, or repost this. I want to show that transphobes like Richard Dawkins are a loud minority that does not represent our community
Actually I do have a question if you have a sec.
Without exception the most transphobic group of scientists I’ve run into online are evolutionary biologists. Every single one of them has expressed the same opinion: transness cannot be anything other than social contagion. Why?
Let’s be very clear here. This is exactly why it was exceptionally unwise of the Supreme Court to wade into this space using ‘biological sex’ as a defining concept, because as soon as you talk to actual biologists the simple binary unravels. Not a stable basis for law.
And by 2028 it will start to realise, with an ageing society and low growth, what a really silly thing it has done.
The right will go "pro-natalist", the centre-left will be completely stuck.
And by 2028 it will start to realise, with an ageing society and low growth, what a really silly thing it has done.
The right will go "pro-natalist", the centre-left will be completely stuck.
But when it does surface, suspect it may be light on detail
as.ft.com/r/bdec77e4-3...
But when it does surface, suspect it may be light on detail
as.ft.com/r/bdec77e4-3...
1/3
1/3
It must be read:
It must be read:
From Sharyn Alfonsi’s email to her ‘60 Minutes’ colleagues, posted by the NYT Michael Grynbaum:
From Sharyn Alfonsi’s email to her ‘60 Minutes’ colleagues, posted by the NYT Michael Grynbaum:
Treating this unsubstantiated and, frankly, insane claim as straightforwardly factual is extremely bad intellectual practice.
- "keep it in the ground" is an outcome, not a strategy
- US net exports of O&G are good for decarb, particularly if we redistribute producer earnings and invest in clean energy + electrification
Treating this unsubstantiated and, frankly, insane claim as straightforwardly factual is extremely bad intellectual practice.
techcrunch.com/2025/12/17/f...
edzitronswheresyouredatghostio.outpost.pub/public/promo...
edzitronswheresyouredatghostio.outpost.pub/public/promo...