61–70 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's because they are male, obviously. "Man" is the word we use to describe an adult person who is male.
"We" is an assumed group of people who agree with you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nevertheless, when it comes to top research, Germany has become a shadow of its former self. No way around it. This graph speaks volumes. Prior to Nazism, Germans would collect as many science Nobel Prizes as the British, the French and the Americans together . https://preview.redd.it/nobel-prizes-by-country-manually-upd...
While I agree with you that Germany doesn't have the intellectual prowess it once may have had, I don't think you can consider the Nobel prize a valid metric, personally. The Nobel prize has subverted itself many times over. While German academia was rebuilding itself, American academia was chasing clout - one side effect being that the Nobel prize is more of a carnival attraction than an academic accomplishment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read all of her tweets but I don't know of any anti-trans statements by Rowling. I'd appreciate it if you could point one out. I haven't heard her say that there's anything wrong with being trans, that it's an illness, or that there should be any consequences. I have heard her decry the excesses of some trans activists and allies, particularly in her defense of women-only spaces. That seems to me to be a poor fit f…
This is something she wrote on Twitter... JK Rowling wrote, "There are no trans kids. No child is 'born in the wrong body'. There are only adults like you, prepared to sacrifice the health of minors to bolster your belief in an ideology that ends up wrecking more harm than lobotomies and false memory syndrome combined."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is something she wrote on Twitter... JK Rowling wrote, "There are no trans kids. No child is 'born in the wrong body'. There are only adults like you, prepared to sacrifice the health of minors to bolster your belief in an ideology that ends up wrecking more harm than lobotomies and false memory syndrome combined."
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I get you're trying to highlight jkr's anti-trans opinion, both can be true. You can be an asshole, while also being subject to other assholes behavior.
I read all of her tweets but I don't know of any anti-trans statements by Rowling. I'd appreciate it if you could point one out. I haven't heard her say that there's anything wrong with being trans, that it's an illness, or that there should be any consequences. I have heard her decry the excesses of some trans activists and allies, particularly in her defense of women-only spaces. That seems to me to be a poor fit f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read all of her tweets but I don't know of any anti-trans statements by Rowling. I'd appreciate it if you could point one out. I haven't heard her say that there's anything wrong with being trans, that it's an illness, or that there should be any consequences. I have heard her decry the excesses of some trans activists and allies, particularly in her defense of women-only spaces. That seems to me to be a poor fit f…
She deals exclusively in dogwhistles. Using a dogwhistle instead of more well-known hate speech does not mean a person is innocent of bigotry - quite the opposite.
One of his less famous works is a audio play based heavily on Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. A recommended listen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darkside_(radio_play)
GUIL: Hm? ROS: Yes? GUIL: What? ROS: I thought you... GUIL: No. ROS: Ah.
See now while I love this play I don't find that exchange notable. It's very plain, no? The implication is that one thought the other was going to say something but he wasn't. This exact dialogue takes place in real life regularly. The alternative reading, where an entire exchange cleverly takes place without any substance, seems almost mistaken to me? In context it seems very clear it's "I thought you...[were going…
It starts off with G thinking R has said something, but G is wrong - R didn't say anything. It ends up with G telling R he hadn't said anything, but again G is wrong, G started the whole thing off when he says Hm?
This is funny because R ends up thinking he'd imagined G saying something when infact the opposite happened.
It fits the characters well with G frequently being clever with no common sense and R having common sense but not being terribly smart.