An Irish beer company, weirdly.

Cretin

Well I gave it a go, but the very first argument was a straw man, so I didn’t have the energy to filter through 30 minutes of biased, disingenuous and amateurish documentary. If you could give me some readable sources, from credible sources, that would be great. You’ve made a lot of extraordinary claims in your original comment…

Gonna need a source of two there, chief.

If absolutely is not. 30 years is possible, and en perpétuité (forever) in very rare cases.

“Being really well dressed and using style to win people over is in the fascist playbook as well. Therefore drag queens are fascist.”
That’s you. That’s you right now.

Thanks for saying so, I’m glad that the message came across.

The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.

No.
If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.

And you think by proving that technicality you’ll somehow win the argument and be correct about the rest? Give me a break.
Ok, your alliance’s border, then. Or the western world’s border. Or “the furthest east you can impose another fucking airstrip”. Whatever you prefer. Point still stands.

Your funds are being used so that Ukrainian soldiers can risk their lives defending your border with your biggest enemy.

That’s great I love it. I do the opposite, I like to give banal items overly technical names. Chair=orthogonal spinal support unit. Hammer=non-calibrated adjustment appliance, etc.

I’m not usually that guy but this seems to be the thread for it. Initialisms and acronyms are both types of abbreviation, where you pronounce acronyms as a word (NASA) and initialisms as individual letters (FBI).
I’ve had meetings at work over this. I had to draw a flow chart.

That’s happened in french and Italian too then, “une orange” and “un’arancia”. Wild.

You wouldn’t download an car

Upper-class British used to ‘drop the h’ on words with a french root to show off their education. Historic had a silent H but hawk did not, for example.
Side note: H has a silent H, it’s “aitch” not “haitch”.

That’s why they stopped at three. The fourth bridge always takes forever to paint.

I think it’s just an assumption based on the mode of society at that time in history. If it was built in the 12th century it was built by what we would now consider slaves. In the 1100s the land was divided into fiefs and the lord of that land considered the people who lived and worked on the land as part of that land: serfs. Unless this bridge was an exception to the rule, then serfs would have undertaken all the labour that got it built.

This comment is useless. Why don’t you start a discussion by giving some reason why you think none of the examples given are neurodivergent?

“That Thou Art Mindful of Him” is the robot story of Asimov’s that scared me the most, because of this exact reasoning happening. I remember closing the book, staring into space and thinking ‘shit…we are all gonna die’