3 ≈ 1 > 4 > 2 to my eye :) 2 is beautiful but the background feels a bit too saturated for the colours to shine, IMO

All sorts of bigots are unhealthily obsessed with the things they hate. It’s not a unique phenomenon & not hard to notice. But gays have to be blamed for their own oppression somehow, I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

OR you’re homophobic enough to think being gay is an insult so you’re sticking it to the homophobes by calling them that (we are on our second decade out from the 2000s. Catch up.)

Either you’re dimwitted and homophobic enough to think that’s true / that straight people are too angelic to account for a substantial amount of homophobia (please have a serious thought for once in your life),

I did read it. I also read the post I was replying to, in which you literally say the words ‘Unless you’re ill, there is no excuse to be obese.’ Perhaps you ought to get your story straight before you get pissy with people for responding to your own words :)

If you’re interested in ‘stating the facts’, why would you ignore the ones that have to do with how genetics & other conditions that aren’t per se illnesses also have a role in determining weight? Is it perhaps because they don’t serve your purpose of ego–stroking under the guise of concern? Hmm!

No need for the snark, I did read it. If you want to engage with what I actually said, feel free; if you don’t, you don’t have to respond at all ♥

Why does that make this topic more nuanced? The fact that some, even many, teachers are not good at their jobs (or good people) should not have anything to do with teachers in general having robust union protections? I agree what you’re talking about is a huge problem, but not one solved by that.

(Difficult topic to discuss with these character limits!)

I don’t think those people solely get to define those terms for the collective. So I get where I think you’re coming from, but I do balk at labelling all trans people inherently nb — that feels a lot like misgendering people who find fulfillment in preexisting genders.

proof to me that those identities are not restrictive or incompatible with the fact that gender is ultimately a personal, individualised thing; they’re just umbrella groups, like any other ID. For sure, lots of individual people do have overly restrictive views of what M & F ‘are’ or ‘mean’, but

I see. I think where we differ is that IMO, the rigidity only comes from *enforcement* of the gender binary, but not the gender options themselves. There are so many people with vastly different conceptions of gender & themselves who willingly share the mantle of M or F, that in itself is

If all nb means is rejecting the gender spectrum and has nothing to do with whether your gender identity aligns with the binary or not, by that logic, wouldn’t a lot of cis people be nb too? What’s the point of redefining it so broadly? Not trying to pick a fight, genuinely curious