Hats for Rats

1. If you see this post, highly recommend taking it as an opportunity to set a timer for 15 minutes and switch over to ACTIVITY YOU ENJOY. if after those 15 minutes, you want to go back to scrolling, that's okay!

2. Huge shout out to this popping up in my notifs often, bc I do go back to activity.

I have been watching it for a while and there are some people against this. Basically saying its unconstitutional against individual rights but for me. This is a HUGE win for women and children.

One of the things that has been changed is if you commit violent crimes more than once. A judge is supposed to look at the pattern of behaviour and you are then suppose to prove to the judge you arent a harm to the public before you get bail. Which is known as 'reverse onus'. So no more beating your wife 8 times and getting bail every single time. You have to prove you aren't a danger. The courts dont just automatically grant it.

This is HUGE! Like this is massive! We all know of cases where a man is arrested for domestic violence and when he bails out, he goes and does it again or even worse he kills his partner. This helps prevent that happening again. He does it and he then has to prove he deserves bail and he won't be a harm to the community.

And then the bill ALSO adjusts it for sexual crimes. So those criminals will automatically have reverse onus if they have committed sexual assault involving choking, suffocating or strangulation. Which is a HUGE win in my eyes!

They also increased the time period judges can look back. So a judge can look back at criminal history up to 10 years in some cases. And they will automatically have reverse onus applied if they have had 2 prior violent offenses on their record.

As for the sentancing, the judges MUST look at certain aggravating factors to gauge the severity of the sentancing to make sure it matches the severity of the offense. These include if the charges are related to children or involve intimate or domestic violence but it also allows judges to look back 5 years for prior convictions of similar nature and add that as an aggravating factor!

They also remove conditional sentances, so those that allow house arrest on anyone found guilty of serious sexual offense, including those against children! In Canada we all heard about the pedo in Edmonton who was allowed to be on house arrest only blocks away from the victim he assaulted. There would be no more of that!

There is so much more that can be done but this is major! This is such a huge win for the safety of women and children when it comes to sexual abuse and domestic abuse. It gives them more safety and in turn keeps the public safer.

Back in second grade, a girl in my class asked me if I was straight or gay. I said I didn’t understand what those words meant. She tried to explain. Said she was straight, and tried to explain what that meant. I didn’t fully understand and I couldn’t give an answer. I always found the conversation odd. Because did she ask everybody else that? But it was honestly probably my clothes and mannerisms. That made her ask.

I know in some of the anti-very-young-transition studies they say that a lot of extremely GNC kids just grow up to be gay or bisexual rather than trans. And I suppose that happens to some people. Not me. I don’t think I’ve ever had a crush on a girl. I kind of forced myself to? In middle school? Based on weird assumptions about who “people like me” were into based on various media I’d seen. But I wasn’t actually attracted to her. It was more like, if I was hypothetically forced to date a girl (which I know would never happen), she would be my pick for person I would hate the least to be dating. Given that she was nice to me.

But when I actually transitioned into being a man, I don’t think I ever called myself gay. I can’t remember a time I used the word or any of the gay/MLM flags, or actually interacted with the mlm community. It’s probably one of many, many signs during my transition that I wasn’t actually comfortable being a man. Others sometimes saw me as a gay man? For better or for worse? But I don’t think I did. If you had called me straight to my face, I probably would have said that was transphobic. But I didn’t actually see myself as “not straight”. I was “a man who was attracted to other men”, yeah, but that didn’t feel gay in my mind.

The thing is that a lot of detrans straight women are… well… a lot of them are Christians, for one. I know one of the detransitioners in the news a lot is a born-again Christian. Which definitely makes me… doubt the motives of their detransition. It feels very “Christian ex-gay” vibes to me. Not a lot of them have more masculine presentations either. Which I do. I also actually like some of my masculine features from T too. If I do the math, there’s more about it I regret, and overall if I had the option to go back and not take it I would. But… like… I like what it did to my facial structure, for one. Even if I know that that’s not necessarily “attractive” to the average straight guy.

Honestly, so much “straight detrans” stuff is just detrans kink. Which, even if you manage to look past the “graphic depictions of raping someone to forcefully remind them of their female anatomy and make them stop being trans” parts of detrans kink (which I can’t), the vast majority of it doesn’t describe a consensual detransition. It is forcing yourself to deny your true identity and preferred presentation for a straight male partner. Part of the reason so many trans men attracted to men date each other is the sheer amount of horror stories about cis guys with this kink in real life. Who only date trans men in an attempt to manipulate them into femininity.

And I don't think this is so mysterious, if people that can't get a job and a house soon after college graduation also don't have kids soon after college graduation.

i know it sounds too convenient, but really, I don't think we've ruled out that around replacement is the post-sexual revolution normal in a healthy economy.

After the female body recovers from her starvation, there is a distinct possibility that she will never be able to get pregnant or carry a pregnancy to term. Even if she is able to, this process will likely be far more difficult and unlikely than it would typically be.

These facts directly dispute the oft repeated claim that a woman's biological purpose is to reproduce. When given the choice between survival and reproduction, the female body chooses, time and time again, survival. Reproduction is not prioritized in the slightest; in fact, it is often the very first bodily function to be shut down--literally deemed the least important part of a woman's body. And this choice of survival--the prioritization of the heart, the lungs, the bones--over the reproductive system is not even to the purpose of allowing a woman to reproduce later in life; no, the reproductive system is at the very least damaged, if not debilitated for the rest of the woman's life.

If the female body, as so many claim, was biologically "meant" to first and foremost reproduce, perhaps it would choose to increase libido and prioritize the reproductive system in order to let the woman birth a descendant before ultimately dying. This is not what the female body does. The female body itself declares that its own life, not that of which it could create, is the most important, that the female body, alive, is worthy even if it never passes its genes on. The female body declares that it is not alive only to further humanity, to reproduce and then die, but instead to live; to live its own life, following the desires of the woman in command of it and no one else.

Say for example, you're studying abroad and will be staying with a homestay family during your time abroad, then it's polite to bring something special and unique from your country / region, like candy, spices or seasoning, etc. to give as a gift to your homestay family. Or maybe you're doing a work exchange program, then the same applies that you should bring a gift that's unique to your country / region for your colleagues during your time in the work exchange program.

This also applies if you have loved ones living abroad, or you're living abroad and going to visit your loved ones in your country of origin.

In the case of visiting a loved one who lives abroad, be sure to bring them something that's a "comfort" from home that's difficult or not possible to get where they live. Maybe a special tea or snack that they miss from home that's easy to fit in your suitcase. Or vice versa, when living abroad and going back to visit your loved ones in your country of origin, it's nice to bring them something special and/or unique from where you've been living.

If you don't have a huge budget, it doesn't have to be something fancy or expensive. A bag of candy that's easy to pass around and share with everyone is a popular and easy choice.

In the case of studying abroad and/or doing a work exchange program, part of the reason for bringing a gift is to show gratitude to your hosts for being willing to host you, and it's good to make a good impression on your hosts since they will likely be your front line for helping you adjust to the country you're studying or working in.

The biggest problem is that people don't treat it like a drug. Libfems act like it's a sexist injustice that hormonal birth control requires a prescription at all, using false equivalencies with condoms. In my experience, doctors treat the pill like a cure-all vitamin and don't really discuss the side effects with any seriousness. I mean, when I was a teenager a doctor suggested the pill as a treatment for my mild acne that didn't require treatment at all, and it was like they expected I would inevitably be on the pill so might as well start young. When I was on the pill in college, it seriously fucked up my mental health to the point of being so anxious I often couldn't talk with one kind and being near suicidal with another. I didn't get any real warning about that besides vague talk of "mood changes" that sounded mild. I got far more more discussion of the mild side effects of my adhd meds.

Working at Harvard in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s as a “Computer”, Annie Jump Cannon cataloged stars using their spectra from photographic plates, in an effort to understand the mysteries and peculiarities of stellar spectra.

This was hard, detailed, nuanced work. By 1889, three years into her work, she had classified over 1,000 stars. By 1913, she could classify 200 stars an hour. She could classify three stars a minute, just by sight. Using a magnifying glass, she could classify stars down to 9th magnitude, 16 times fainter than the human eye can see. And she did this all with exceptional accuracy.

Over the course of her career, she personally classified more than 350,000 stars, accounting for a mind-boggling 98% of all contemporary stellar spectra classifications, a feat that wouldn’t be bested until the 1990’s with automated digital sky surveys.

Cannon used these classifications to develop the Harvard spectral classification system (O–B–A–F–G–K–M), organizing stars by surface temperature and physical properties.

It is hard to overstate just how foundational her work was to modern astronomy and astrophysics. Her classifications have enabled more than a century of breakthroughs in stellar structure and evolution, including the understanding of how stars change over time and how temperature, luminosity, and composition are related. The system underpins the Hertzsprung–Russell (HR) diagram, one of the most important tools in astrophysics, and remains embedded in modern research, from stellar population studies to galaxy evolution.

I'm steelmanning this argument as best as I can and I've cut out several other things where I do have a concrete negative opinion, but hopefully you get the gist. To keep steelmanning I'd cut out the bits where they say men _are not_ ruled by emotion to the same extent they claim women are, so let's focus away from that.

I remember reading that there were some feminists in the 70s who saw artificial gestation as a tool to liberate women, so that's what I'd like to focus on more here. With female-shaped sex dolls I think the arguments are generally about escalating to dangerous behaviour via porn and also the potential to make the doll resemble an actual person in real life, or even a child.

What do you all make of this? Link to the thread: https://alogs.space/robowaifu/res/1061.html

My number one focus is child welfare.

My second concern is the commodification of the family.

Let's talk about children first. Pregnancy is not passive. The baby develops senses within utero. The first noise your baby ever hears is the pulse of mothers blood. They feel every breath. They feel every laugh. They feel their mother running, jumping, lifting, working, crying, singing, they feel endorphins and cortisol. They recognize their mother's voice first, and will respond to it. They recognize other people's voices too who speak to them daily. When born, they recognize songs that are sung to them during pregnancy. Baby is so connected to mother that if baby is separated from mother after birth, even if she never holds the baby, and the baby is raised in a devoted loving stable household, the baby still experiences a trauma of being separated from mother, who was the baby's entire world prior to birth (this is why adoptees have a higher rate of suicide even when adopted at birth, it is an inherent trauma). Baby receives most antibodies in utero, not breast milk. So when we are attempting to gestate a baby in a machine, we are experimenting on children. We are sabotaging their natural development and could create very immunocompromised babies, babies with severe delays that we have never experienced before. "Artificial wombs" are currently being developed for severely premature babies, there is a use to this technology beyond cruel experimental purposes.

Now for commodification and destruction of the family unit. It drives the ruling class absolutely bonkers that familial bonding is something they cannot sell. They are trying to, hence fertility and surrogacy industries, but it's still something that is innate. Human beings will prioritize their children over everything else (in a general sense), they will sacrifice careers for their children, they will immigrate to give their children a better life, they will break laws to protect their children, they will get involved in politics to secure their children's futures. You can try really really hard but you can't really take away this familial bond, especially the bond between mother and child. Mother's love for her child means that her loyalty will never be to the state or a corporation, it will always prioritize her children. This drives tech bros insane, who want to commodify everything including intelligence "that you can buy from a meter" as per Sam Altman. The political push to destroy family bonds and the family unit is not in anyone's best interest except those who profit from it.

If we are going to talk about this in any feminist context, it is womb envy. Men cannot create life. This drives them insane. Women have power men do not. This is why the male is obsessed with death and destruction, because it is the only thing that gives him a god complex. Women quite literally have the power of creation, the power of God, and that is the basis of sexism, men controlling women's reproductive capabilities. This is the obsession that drives rich men into fantasizing about artificial wombs, not the baby's welfare.

That and, this might go against the steelman stuff, but the kind of men who want to fully replace women with sex dolls are unlikely to be trustworthy around children either.

I don't know about the family angle since these people seem to blame women and feminism specifically for destroying the family unit. They're trying to recreate it without women, basically. I don't really expect it to turn out well given random stuff I remember about Sparta but then again that was an ancient warrior society so maybe things would go better.

I see why you're saying this but I honestly don't think womb envy is useful for analysis. Structure of that whole argument is pretty much the same in that thread, just that "<sex class> simply don't know they're actually ruled by such and such emotion even though they think it's reason." On a more personal level I just can't understand why someone would be envious of birth etc either but that's a me problem.