• 1 Post
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 23rd, 2023

help-circle
  • Also called “at will” employment. The employer can fire you “at will” and you have the “right to work” somewhere else.

    What it actually is is a union busting law. You have the “right to work” for an employer without being required to join a union. Generally this means being covered by any collective bargaining agreement but not paying the union dues. Which means the union collapses because it can’t afford to keep itself running. These are the laws that collapsed the American trade union movement.




  • Skydancer@pawb.socialtoMemes@lemmy.mlDeception
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Granted, Biden did almost nothing to slow it down, and kept Israel well supplied with the weapons of genocide. Do you really think it’s a coincidence that Netanyahu waited until the day after the election to announce that Palestinians won’t be allowed to return to northern Gaza though?

    Granted, that was almost certainly the plan all along, but now even the fig leaf is gone. Without the need to devote any thought at all to political cover, Israel will stop even pretending to internal investigations of accusations against their own soldiers and redeploy those resources to the battlefield.

    The number of Palestinian deaths may not be different, but they’ll die even sooner.













  • Favorite would be a highly customized zsh.

    fizsh (not fish) is what I actually end up using, as I can’t be bothered to copy that config around and retune it for each machine. Gives me the syntactic sugar of zsh with common default options on by default, an OK default prompt, and doesn’t break POSIX assumptions like fish. Also Installs quickly from the package manager without needing to run through the zsh setup each time - unlike oh-my-zsh. And if I still need customization, all the zsh options are still there.


  • No - it was the language that I said was transphobic, not the author. Given that there were two different word choices (“transsexual” and “perceived gender”) that reinforced each other, it seems more likely than not that they reflected the mindset of the author, but not having looked further for their other writings I was not sure. That’s why I said " transphobic language" and not “transphobic author”.



  • There’s nothing wrong with the example in and of itself, but the word “transsexual” in place of “transgender” is not generally random. It is explicitly chosen by Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) as well as by right-wing transphobes as a dog whistle to conflate gender dysphoria with drag queens and cross-dess fetishists so as to delegitimise transpeople and suggest some sort of sexual deviance. Coupled with the equivocation of “perceived” gender, motive doesn’t even have to come into it. The words themselves and the concepts they reinforce are transphobic and harmful.

    A witch hunt would have been for me to say that the author is a transphobic asshole whose writings need to be wiped from the internet - which is very far from what I actually posted, which was regret for the way the language they chose distracted from the flow of their argument by reinforcing the social stigmatization of trans people. (Edit: That was a deliberate choice on my part. Not knowing enough about the author to be sure of motives and having no desire to deep dive into their history, I decided that it was only appropriate to point out the hurtful nature of the language and not imply motive.)