Gay ass math

I have type 2 Narcolepsy. Studies have shown that serious viral infections can cause people to develop Narcolepsy if they are already genetically susceptible to having it. This includes covid. That is what happened to me.

Yall, I can’t believe that I have to do this, but I am going to say this in as clearly as possible

The anon was very confused.

Clothing company Patagonia is currently sueing drag queen Pattie Gonia for "irreparable” harm to their brand.

To be clear; Pattie named herself after the region in South America.

So Pattie is asking people to politely ask Patagonia to drop the lawsuit.

I'm extending the invitation to all of you, because sueing a drag queen for 'infringement' in the current political cultural landscape is vile. Especially a drag queen who has raised millions of dollars for non-profits, uses her platform to raise awareness for climate activism, and fully aligns with Patagonia's apparent climate-conscious mission statement.

They're claiming they're sueing for $1. They're actually asking her to stop using her name, and pay over $1 million in legal fees. They're straight up harassing her.

In contrast, drag queen Jan Sport has a Jansport bag line. It's that easy to just... work with a queen.

Anyway. Be respectful(ish), but feel free to be annoying on Patagnoia's socials, asking them to 'DROP THE LAWSUIT'

"Pattie named herself after the region in South America." Come the fuck on. https://www.self.com/story/pattie-gonia-backpacking-drag-queen

Patagonia is not trying to "take away her name." Patagonia has no problem with her calling herself Pattie Gonia or performing as such, or using it for activism, or whatever. They are suing her to stop her from directly competing with them with a substantially similar trademark in clothing sales.

You can read the complaint here.

The relevant prayer for relief is on page 34-36. It asks the court to stop Pattie from selling, distributing, or advertising, "any goods or services that display any words or symbols that so resemble the PATAGONIA trademarks as to be likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception;" destroy the merch she was selling that would so cause confusion; and to not do it again in the future. It doesn't ask for damages more than $1 and for attorneys fees (aka pay us back for making us have to file this stupid lawsuit).

It also asks the court to stop Pattie from trying to register her drag name as a trademark specifically to sell branded apparel that says "PATTIEGONIA" - aka the same market, to an overlapping sales base.

2. Yeah this is 100% a "brand conflict." Patagonia had no issues with her existence, her drag name, her activism. (According to facts in the complaint, which she has not denied) it had no issue with even her partnering with competing brands, as long as

When Pattie started selling her own branded merch, Patagonia tried to reach out to her to resolve things informally. They were not able to do so. (And in my opinion, the email from Pattie in response looks really really bad - as I read it, it is essentially a threat to try to use her fanbase and progressive credentials to attack and harm Patagonia's brand if they try to enforce their trademark. And to be clear - if she has issues with Patagonia's actions as a brand, using those as a private threat against the company to advance her commercial interests while continuing to publicly directly associate herself with the brand - examples both in the lawsuit and in this thread: https://bsky.app/profile/kathryntewson.bsky.social/post/3mnbadc2egk2e - is. Well, I don't think it's behavior that looks good for Pattie.)

They filed this lawsuit b/c she filed to trademark the "Pattie Gonia" brand to directly compete with Patagonia in the same market. This is 100% a brand conflict. She's just lying to people.

Two other quick comments:

OP above used scare quotes around "irreparable" harm. This happens every time there is a lawsuit for injunctive relief and the person posting about it wants to make the plaintiff sound unreasonable and absurd. Irreparable harm is just literally the legal standard for injunctive relief.

I think OP's comment that, "In contrast, drag queen Jan Sport has a Jansport bag line. It's that easy to just... work with a queen," is ironically a good demonstration about the potential for brand confusion. Based on this comment, OP is demonstrating that their assumption, should they see "Pattie Gonia" branded clothing, is that it would be a collaboration. But Pattie Gonia wasn't trying to work with Patagonia. She specifically said she did not want to do so. She wants sell her own merch.

On Pattie's website, she says about this lawsuit,

I agree with Pattie on this point. But right now, while there are so many attacks on both the climate and on queer people, especially trans people? To lie about a (legally speaking, entirely reasonable, lawsuit) and to use people's fears and concerns in the - as OP says - "current political landscape" - to try to sell you her own merch? (Because that is what the lawsuit is about. She is telling you to harass Patagonia so she can sell you branded merch instead.)

Person pretending to be Macklemore, in a fur coat, turning around (2): What up?

2: Can I get a photo, man?

1: Not unless you're gay, man.

2: What?

1: Not unless you're gay, man.

I mean the line that I think of first is “A kid dies in this movie.”

Which I suspect to horror fans is shorthand for “The director of this movie subverts horror tropes (wherein kids are usually immune to the monster/slasher/source of terror) to make something that is deliberately shocking. Seeing a child character die in this story is not a happy thing or a good thing, but for a horror story emphasizes that nobody is immune to the source of the terror, which makes the horror more serious and scarier.”

Standing in his laboratory, Harvard professor Sean Eddy gazes at a row of vacant work stations. More than a year ago, this lab was filled with over a dozen researchers. On a given day they might be working independently on analyzing genomic sequencing or gathered around the group table, drinking coffee and helping each other troubleshoot questions about genomic data from different species.

Now, after his funding was terminated under the Trump administration, the computer screens are gone and the room is silent. He's one of the last people left.

And I learned to like that and see the appeal in that, sure. There are lots of stories that were made for an audience of little boys that I ended up liking. But I always wanted something that told me boys like me, who didn't want to be violent or competitive, who liked nurturing things and making friends, who avoided fights whenever allowed, were valid.

So I was really happy when Steven Universe came around and was exactly that - the kind of show a sensitive little boy like I used to be would have killed to see. And very shortly after that I was crushed when the growing criticism of the show repeated the refrain that it was bad mainly because Steven was a pacifist who cried and didn't want to be violent and liked nurturing things and making friends instead of killing people. I wasn't surprised, no, it made perfect sense people would hate it for being that, but I was crushed all the same.

Our society only accepts a very narrow definition of masculinity, and kindness isn't allowed to play a very big role in it. That's one of the reasons I quit it.