Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
also before it starts to happen: if i see a single person calling july “gay wrath month” or saying “we deserve a second one” it is ON SIGHT. that is DISABILITY PRIDE MONTH. abled queers i will run you over with my wheelchair if you so much as reblog one of those comments.
hello! reblog this version instead!
Hello! Disabled person here. Did you know those of us declared legally disabled and collect SSI and benefits are barred from getting married? Yep! I’m also queer so this isn’t hate at all, it’s a call to action: if you love marriage equality, come help us fight for ours.
Years ago I overheard (eavesdropped upon) a telephone conversation between a public parks official and a golf course owner.
Parks Official: No sir, you cannot
Parks Official: No. They are a protected species
Parks Official: You CANNOT shoot them
Parks Official: Or poison them, no. Or trap them
Parks Official: If you like, we can– no, I’m it. I’m the ranking official here. There’s nobody above me. My boss? You mean… the governor’s office? Sure, I guess. Okay bye
After he hung up, he gave me this thousand-yard stare before answering my unvoiced question.
“There’s a flock of flamingos at the 9th green disrupting golfers. He wanted permission to go out there with a shotgun and take care of matters, but sensed there might be… legal ramifications. So he called us.”
I laughed. “Does that happen often?”
“Oh, we get calls like that a couple times a month.”
Country clubs should be burned to the ground and their golf courses turned into community gardens i am 10000% serious
Was golf created for the sole purpose of hoarding ridiculously large amounts of land just to brag about how little they use it?
“In knocking down President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, the right-wing Supreme Court majority does more than keep millions of American saddled with debt — it continues to shift enormous power away from Congress and the executive branch to itself. The majority — “as is becoming the norm,” Justice Elena Kagan narrates in her dissent — relies heavily on the major questions “doctrine,” a theory in vogue in right-wing legal circles. It dictates that when executive branch agencies take action of major “economic and political significance,” they lose the usual judicial deference they enjoy. That standard of significance is wholly in the eye of the beholder — an amorphousness the majority has continually taken advantage of. That has usually translated, in the hands of this conservative Court, into various Biden administration actions meeting their doom. While the Court often protests that it’s really shifting power back to Congress when it knocks down agency actions, it does so knowing that Congress is usually stalemated by various factors (split party control, the Senate filibuster) that make it extremely difficult for the legislature to pass many major laws. It also disrupts the usual separation of powers balance: Congress writes broad laws authorizing agencies to deal with issues (letting the Environmental Protection Agency regulate air pollution or the Education Department deal with federal student debt), passing on the responsibility of crafting the specifics to the expert-staffed agencies. But this Court continues to impose itself on that process, deciding that Congress didn’t meet some vague standard of specificity in its delegation and knocking down agency actions it doesn’t like. “This Court objects to Congress’s permitting the Secretary (and other agency officials) to answer so-called major questions,” Kagan writes, referring, in this case, to the Secretary of Education. “Or at least it objects when the answers given are not to the Court’s satisfaction. So the Court puts its own heavyweight thumb on the scales.””
Expand SCOTUS. Impeach and remove the corrupt Trump justices, as well as Alito and the PROFOUNDLY corrupt Thomas. Unless and until this happens, SCOTUS is a existential and direct threat to human rights and equality under the law in America.
Analysis of data from dozens of foraging societies around the world shows that women hunt in at least 79% of these societies, opposing the widespread belief that men exclusively hunt and women exclusively gather. Abigail Anderson of Seattle Pacific University, US, and colleagues presented these findings in the open-access journal PLOS ONE on June 28, 2023.
A common belief holds that, among foraging populations, men have typically hunted animals while women gathered plant products for food. However, mounting archaeological evidence from across human history and prehistory is challenging this paradigm; for instance, women in many societies have been found buried alongside big-game hunting tools.
Some researchers have suggested that women’s role as hunters was confined to the past, with more recent foraging societies following the paradigm of men as hunters and women as gatherers. To investigate that possibility, Anderson and colleagues analyzed data from the past 100 years on 63 foraging societies around the world, including societies in North and South America, Africa, Australia, Asia, and the Oceanic region.
They found that women hunt in 79% of the analyzed societies, regardless of their status as mothers. More than 70% of female hunting appears to be intentional—as opposed to opportunistic killing of animals encountered while performing other activities, and intentional hunting by women appears to target game of all sizes, most often large game.
The analysis also revealed that women are actively involved in teaching hunting practices and that they often employ a greater variety of weapon choice and hunting strategies than men. These findings suggest that, in many foraging societies, women are skilled hunters and play an instrumental role in the practice, adding to the evidence opposing long-held perceptions about gender roles in foraging societies. The authors note that these stereotypes have influenced previous archaeological studies, with, for instance, some researchers reluctant to interpret objects buried with women as hunting tools. They call for reevaluation of such evidence and caution against misapplying the idea of men as hunters and women as gatherers in future research.
The authors add, “Evidence from around the world shows that women participate in subsistence hunting in the majority of cultures.”
