while the vancover rape crisis center is ultimately doing a disservice to the people it claims it wants to help in telling somebody they're not welcome, the case strikes me as frivolous, as it was a volunteer position. and, i think that gets to the crux of the issue.
every generalization has a counter-example...
...but trans-women don't generally want to go where they're not wanted, and are usually bright enough to realize the differences.
passing these kinds of laws aren't serious answers to discrimination. most people don't have the resources to fight decades long court battles. what the article really draws attention to is the continuing bigotry that exists in the second-wave and radical feminist communities, and that's a social issue rather than a legal one. but, it's being addressed as well; most feminists today reject the second-wave.
i've never been raped. but, one day, i might be. i mean, i hope not. but, in that scenario, i'm going to go to the groups that accept me, and reject the ones that don't. that experience will repeat itself over time, leaving groups that push exclusionary policies on the outside, looking in. and, they'll complain it's not fair. but, that's how we evolve, socially.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/transgender-rights-bill-female-born-spaces-1.4110634
Saturday, May 13, 2017
watch the video.
it's exactly the right answer. and, the idea that it's expensive is some kind of disincentive is the wrong thinking anyways; building stuff is always good for the economy.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-tour-floods-gatineau-1.4109872
it's exactly the right answer. and, the idea that it's expensive is some kind of disincentive is the wrong thinking anyways; building stuff is always good for the economy.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-tour-floods-gatineau-1.4109872
we used to just print money for infrastructure projects.
i was initially under the impression that this was the purpose of the bank
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/the-house-sohi-infrastructure-bank-1.4113681
i was initially under the impression that this was the purpose of the bank
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/the-house-sohi-infrastructure-bank-1.4113681
the precondition for the invasion of syria was taking the air defences
out from the ground, and we see how hard that's been. short of breaking
the russian-iranian alliance, which appears to be strengthening, it's
hard to see how an invasion of iran is even a viable option. i don't
think it's truly on the table; the strategy is cold war, by necessity,
for the foreseeable future. i suspect trump would rather pick on a
country like nicaragua and tie it to immigration.
good analysis, though.
good analysis, though.
you have to wonder if these butt-hurt corporate liberal stooges were upset when they fired mccarthy, too.
BREAKING STORY: arthur watkins admits that he censured mccarthy because of his activities in the senate.
stop.
cite me some real evidence, or let the story fade into the tabloid trash that it is - and let us take note of who pushed it, and allow it to harm their journalistic credibility.
the guy was making a mockery of the fbi - first with clinton, and now with trump.
it could still swing the senate, if not the house. i get it. voters aren't the brightest, nowadays. but, i'm sick of the bullshit.
BREAKING STORY: arthur watkins admits that he censured mccarthy because of his activities in the senate.
stop.
cite me some real evidence, or let the story fade into the tabloid trash that it is - and let us take note of who pushed it, and allow it to harm their journalistic credibility.
the guy was making a mockery of the fbi - first with clinton, and now with trump.
it could still swing the senate, if not the house. i get it. voters aren't the brightest, nowadays. but, i'm sick of the bullshit.
Ignoring the issue and legalizing pot anyway puts Canada, historically a strong supporter of the UN and other international organizations, in the position of violating international law.
i'm still not convinced that this happens, but if it does happen, then this is how it's going to happen.
the reality is that this government has already signalled that it is going to follow the lead of the united states in abandoning the united nations - hence it's support of unilateral bombing in syria without so much as an apparent thought to the illegality of it. i might even support it as a tactic. the main enforcer here is of course the united states. how can the americans think they can enforce drug treaties, when they ignore climate treaties and randomly bomb whomever they like with impunity? and, how do they expect to enforce this treaty internationally, when they will not enforce it locally?
i'm a strong supporter of the united nations, in principle, but the americans destroyed the institution a long time ago. i put this question out there during the last election: how will this new government react to a world without a rule of law? will it seek to build a new rule of law, or adjust itself to the absence of one? and, trudeau responded very clearly that he would respond to the absence of one.
it's not an answer i liked. but, don't act shocked. this government is, broadly, an extension of the previous one. the policy on the un, like so many other things, is an extension of the previous government's policy, itself a reaction to the united states' rejection of the united nations as a functional body.
this is reality: the united nations is dead.
i would like to rebuild it.
but, do not expect leadership from this government. they're followers; expect them to follow.
i'm still not convinced that this happens, but if it does happen, then this is how it's going to happen.
the reality is that this government has already signalled that it is going to follow the lead of the united states in abandoning the united nations - hence it's support of unilateral bombing in syria without so much as an apparent thought to the illegality of it. i might even support it as a tactic. the main enforcer here is of course the united states. how can the americans think they can enforce drug treaties, when they ignore climate treaties and randomly bomb whomever they like with impunity? and, how do they expect to enforce this treaty internationally, when they will not enforce it locally?
i'm a strong supporter of the united nations, in principle, but the americans destroyed the institution a long time ago. i put this question out there during the last election: how will this new government react to a world without a rule of law? will it seek to build a new rule of law, or adjust itself to the absence of one? and, trudeau responded very clearly that he would respond to the absence of one.
it's not an answer i liked. but, don't act shocked. this government is, broadly, an extension of the previous one. the policy on the un, like so many other things, is an extension of the previous government's policy, itself a reaction to the united states' rejection of the united nations as a functional body.
this is reality: the united nations is dead.
i would like to rebuild it.
but, do not expect leadership from this government. they're followers; expect them to follow.
Concert
halls and arenas along the route have more than 200 events per year. So
there’s little doubt the streetcar will be full of bar-hopping hipsters
and fans of Detroit’s four sports teams.
not if it stops at midnight, it won't.
it would have to run until at least 1:00, and ideally 3:00. but, then, it had might as well always run.
it's the same issue that they have with the tunnel bus. the last bus is at 1:00, which just doesn't make any sense. either you're out late or you're not. so, the people that take the bus take the 11:00 or the 12:00 bus, and the people that stay late come back in the morning. i'm almost always the only person on the thing, but it's only because i so routinely walk distances that people can't fathom. if i cabbed, i'd take the 11:00 or 12:00 bus, when i do.
i mean, i'm glad the 1:00 bus is there, sure. but, given that i'm usually the only person on it, it must run empty most nights. it doesn't actually make sense. what would make sense would be to stop early, or run late. given that the bars close at 2:00, there should be a 2:30 bus - and if there was one, i assure you it would have more demand than the 1:00 bus.
i don't know if this is really what they want this thing to be. but, if it is what they want it to be, they're going to need to extend the hours of it to fit the demand for it.
not if it stops at midnight, it won't.
it would have to run until at least 1:00, and ideally 3:00. but, then, it had might as well always run.
it's the same issue that they have with the tunnel bus. the last bus is at 1:00, which just doesn't make any sense. either you're out late or you're not. so, the people that take the bus take the 11:00 or the 12:00 bus, and the people that stay late come back in the morning. i'm almost always the only person on the thing, but it's only because i so routinely walk distances that people can't fathom. if i cabbed, i'd take the 11:00 or 12:00 bus, when i do.
i mean, i'm glad the 1:00 bus is there, sure. but, given that i'm usually the only person on it, it must run empty most nights. it doesn't actually make sense. what would make sense would be to stop early, or run late. given that the bars close at 2:00, there should be a 2:30 bus - and if there was one, i assure you it would have more demand than the 1:00 bus.
i don't know if this is really what they want this thing to be. but, if it is what they want it to be, they're going to need to extend the hours of it to fit the demand for it.
so, it turns out that the streetcar is operational in detroit, as of yesterday. it's free this weekend - and i suspect, for many people, it always will be.
my honest assessment is that it's not likely that i'll use it during peak hours. to me, it's utility would be getting me back to the tunnel to catch the 1:09 bus, or maybe zooming me between bars, after hours. if the last run ends before 00:00, i'll never not prefer to walk, with the possible exception of wanting to flee the rain.
i'm not sure they'll see a demand for all night streetcars. but, that's the only use i'd really have for them.
my honest assessment is that it's not likely that i'll use it during peak hours. to me, it's utility would be getting me back to the tunnel to catch the 1:09 bus, or maybe zooming me between bars, after hours. if the last run ends before 00:00, i'll never not prefer to walk, with the possible exception of wanting to flee the rain.
i'm not sure they'll see a demand for all night streetcars. but, that's the only use i'd really have for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)