WittyProfileName2 [she/her]

What’s the source of that last image? I’m really hoping that’s one of the examples from the 80s and not a recent one…

Yeah, that’s an 80’s one. Here it is in the Tory Party’s online archive.

I’m hoping this is just me dooming but having grown up in the dying days of section 28, I’m genuinely scared for this next generation of queer people.

Section 28 of the 1988 local government act (often just referred to colloquially as section 28), was a law that made it illegal to discuss queer identities in schools.

It was repealed in 2003, but the recent resurgence of homophobia in parliament is using a similar language around “protecting children” is identical to the shit Thatcher and her cronies were throwing around in the 80’s.

Yeah, and they’ve jumped the “protect our kids” wankery into overdrive as well.

Complete doomer mode: I think they’re also gonna re-establish section 28 soon.

It’s been this kind of shit hole surveillance state for a long time. Look at the snooper’s charter/investigatory powers act, for example.

During the state mandated mourning, a man was arrested for carrying a piece of blank paper because the police thought he might write a protest slogan on it later.

Manpril sounds like an over-the-counter erectile dysfunction medicine that’s got a list of side effects taller than the bottle it comes in.

Huge problem imho, is that a lot of these people who rattle on about voting for harm reduction candidates go home after voting on election day and then don’t get involved politically until the next election cycle.

In these bourgeois “democracies” political parties are always going to move to court wealthy donors and thus shift right wing. If you lot over in America can’t mobilise enough people out in the street to fight for these causes, to grind your country to a screaming halt if needs be, then the Dems will be where labour is soon. Maybe not this election, but check back in with this comment by the midterms.

I guess there’s some small comfort that they’ll at least pay lip service to trans rights then.

The labour party won an election over here and one of the first things they did was stop access to puberty blockers. During the election I was told by a lot of liberals preaching harm reduction that, as a trans woman, that I had to vote for them 'cos the Tories would be worse.

I’m worried about trans people over on your side of the ocean being in a similar position where the elections are between trans exterminationist and transphobe.

Okay, can you be more specific about what they did to minimise damage? Like, did they make trans people a protected class, or relieve the bureaucracy around transitioning, or what?

Not an American, so no real stake in this but, could you tell me what the Democrats have done in the past four years to protect trans rights? Since you’re all so clearly concerned about them an’ all.

That’s a brave person right there, to stand in front of all those tanks.

What happened next? I bet it was something terrible.

Do murder ghosts or whatever count as dependents?

There’s probably some nightmare tax form for this, isn’t there?

Have a good day, friend

You too, mate.

Ah, you’re right, I see now, boiling down Marxist critique into “can’t control emotions” and “only wants money” while celebrating the individualistic ramblings of a lead-poisoned imperial despot, is a much more rational outlook.

Systemic issues aren’t real, you just gotta stop thinking bad thoughts and suddenly the crushing oppression that Aurelius was writing in defense of don’t matter.

“Hmm, why would man sitting on the top of an inherently unjust system preach complacency with said system as a virtue? Must be because he’s super rational and smart.”

• you, somehow still on that slave mentality in the 21st century.

I started mixing hard and soft expletives originally as a joke, yesterday I dropped a plant pot on my foot and before even thinking the first words that came out of my mouth were, “gosh fucking darn it.”

It’s called the Perineal Raphe. It’s the result of the urogenital folds fusing during the development of an embryo.

Baldachin’s Blessing.

You get it from hugging Fia in Roundtable Hold.

That the USSR managed to last long as long as it did despite being invaded by more developed nations multiple times during the aftermath of its revolution and eventually collapsed largely due to its own internal corruption does put paid to the idea that some authoritarian measures will help protect a socialist state from external attempts to destabilise it.

The problem seems to be one inherent within the structure of states. Any heirarchical structure like that is fit to be abused by someone sufficiently self interested that they’d put their own interests above the interests of the people gestures at Mikhail Gorbachev selling the USSR out to the Western core for his own enrichment.

Anarchism, being decentralised, might be able to withstand some of the issues that were present in the late USSR. But previous anarchist attempts have been crushed by outside actors much easier than socialist attempts.

I don’t really know what there is to be done.

I don’t see how to protect this hypothetical socialist state either. Cuba has managed to escape any attempts that the US has made to overthrow it’s democratic mandate but it had the support of the USSR in it’s early stages and there’s no hegemonic power right now that could be of similar help.

I’m not a particularly bright person, and I don’t think I’ll ever have a proper answer.