51–60 of 85 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know that his trans child won't speak to him - I surmise it indicates hate, but perhaps not. Usually when people say things like "this is the final straw" it indicates anger. You can read more on the former by searching "Xavier Musk" and/or "Vivian Musk".
Isn't there an inversion taking place in that logic. It stands that she might hate him, but not that he hates her.
"he hates her" but that
"he hates that she hates him".
Doesn't X have a pretty strict RTO policy? Are they making all of the employees move?
I wonder if there is a chance employees would actually be in favor of that. Considering that the high taxes also affects them and there is also the increasing criminality problem
However, the reality is that if you own a home, taxation in Texas may be even worse than California.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Man who hates that his trans child hates him angry These are very strong accusations. Do you have a reference or is this just an emotional response?
This is discussed in the Walter Isaacson biography that came out last year. Saying he “hates” his daughter is completely wrong and ignores first hand claims from both Musk and his biographer. >Musk only learned she had transitioned through a secondhand source >The wife of Elon's brother got a text, Isaacson wrote, which said: "Hey, I'm transgender, and my name is now Jenna". The text from the child, as in the biograp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is discussed in the Walter Isaacson biography that came out last year. Saying he “hates” his daughter is completely wrong and ignores first hand claims from both Musk and his biographer. >Musk only learned she had transitioned through a secondhand source >The wife of Elon's brother got a text, Isaacson wrote, which said: "Hey, I'm transgender, and my name is now Jenna". The text from the child, as in the biograp…
I didn't say he hates his daughter. I'd suggest you reread.
Doesn't X have a pretty strict RTO policy? Are they making all of the employees move?
I wonder if there is a chance employees would actually be in favor of that. Considering that the high taxes also affects them and there is also the increasing criminality problem
https://wallethub.com/edu/best-worst-states-to-be-a-taxpayer...
Texas also has worse public services so you’re going to be paying more out of pocket for replacements, too, and spending more time indoors due to the climate and lack of things like parks.
Now, if you’re the boss this is fine because you have such high income that the difference in property and local taxes doesn’t come anywhere near cancelling out your savings on income taxes, but that’s not true for most employees. Everyone I know who’s moved from California, DC, or NYC moved back because it wasn’t really cheaper and the quality of life was so much lower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is discussed in the Walter Isaacson biography that came out last year. Saying he “hates” his daughter is completely wrong and ignores first hand claims from both Musk and his biographer. >Musk only learned she had transitioned through a secondhand source >The wife of Elon's brother got a text, Isaacson wrote, which said: "Hey, I'm transgender, and my name is now Jenna". The text from the child, as in the biograp…
[flagged]
Let's just be disrespectful to women by speaking for them and assuming they're a homogenous indistinguishable group that all think in lockstep.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yes - I agree (I am a parent) that the law is stupid. If a kid doesn't want their parents to know something they should do it the old fashion way and lie as I did and my parents did before me etc:) The law seems to be about making it possible for kids to lie without the school snitching on them. You should be in favor of this law, no?
First the :) means I was somewhat joking. Second as much as I love CA the state has become increasingly interested in creating unenforcible and intrusive laws. Although I can see a case for protecting children from abusive parents (we have laws for that already) it seems to ignore other things. Like the following: 1. AFAIK - If a kid decides to change their pronoun around their friends the school is not required to r…
There are laws preventing gross abuse, yes, but there’s still a great deal of harm which won’t get action or won’t get it in time. If you beat your gay/trans child, yes, the cops are in your future but you can ground them forever, surround them with people who tell them they’re going to burn in hell for expressing their identity, or ship them off to some kind of unregulated Bible camp/school and likely see no consequences.
Not LGBT but if you haven’t read Jesus Land, it’s brutal and a good reminder of what happens at these private “reform” schools – and I note that the decades of abuse finally being disclosed meant that a different church bought it and hired many of the staff:
https://archive.org/details/jesuslandmemoir0000sche
That’s a common problem with laws like this: they sound over the top - and will be the target for lazy jokes – because they’re focused on stopping the edge cases which most people aren’t really aware of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First the :) means I was somewhat joking. Sure, but about what? To me it came across as "I acknowledge my kids' right to privacy and chose to phrase this humorously". Now it sounds more like "I deny my kids' right to privacy and chose to phrase this humorously". > 3. Where's the data to back this decision up? As I understand it from other posters, individual schools had already ordered their teachers to snitch to p…
"The measure Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed on Monday, is the first to rebuke laws in a handful of other states that say educators must alert parents if a student requests to go by a different name or pronouns. At least 10 states say educators and classmates don’t have to use a student’s name or pronouns if it doesn’t align with a student’s sex assigned at birth." [1] [1] https://www.edweek.org/leadership/should…
No, it wasn't. The article is, at best, abusing "rebuke" to mean "buck the trend", but the law does not literally rebuke foreign state laws.
It addresses two related issues, both of which do, in fact, exist in California:
(1) It provides school-based support and resources for LGBTQ+ students and families thereof responsive to research on specific needs of that community, including the significant effect of family support on well-being,
(2) It prohibits local districts from forced-outing policies, which have been adopted by at least four districts (at least one of which has been forced to put enforcement on hold because of a temporary restraining order issued in a lawsuit brought against the policy), and are under discussion by more than a dozen more.