Um, yeah. It’s a little thing called free enterprise, folks. Look it up.

That Time the Libertarian Party Debated the Private Ownership of Nuclear Weapons

I can’t believe you would call the vigilante oligarch arms dealer a political extremist.

Antifa calls dissenters (anyone to the right of them like social democrats) fascists

True Centrism is when you’re in favor of a Centrally Planned Economy.

Everyone else is some variant of political extremist.

Adams was sort of all over the place on his opinion of people.

They’re both violent! Or, at least, I’ve been told they’re both violent and the news wouldn’t just lie to me, right?

Who owns these big publications again? Bari Weiss and the Free Press, you say? Well, it’s got Free Press right there in the name, so I’m assuming they’re on the up-and-up.

Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang in Seoul

It is a difficult task to find news and videos that see and present North Korea, as a country. An actual place where people live and North Koreans as a people, not as a herd of complacent sheep under the thumb of a “despot”.

The film “Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang in Seoul” addresses the common view of North Korea head-on and asks a very simple question, is any of it true?

…

“Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang in Seoul” or “LCPIS” gives insight into how the war has affected those in the South and those in the North. What’s more important is that the narratives of the two “former” North Korean Citizens is completely alien to what is commonly said about North Korea.

…

South Korean human rights lawyer Jang Kyong-ook, is the first testimonial of the film and speaks to a variety of abuses that the South Korean government has committed and continues to commit. His explanation of the National Security Act, or NSA for short shows South Korea in a much different light than the West presents it.

Often the South is said to be the good half of Korea, it was the one to embrace democracy and economic liberalism after all. The reality is, the South was ruled by numerous dictators, committed dozens if not hundreds of war crimes in the Korean War, and as mercenaries during the Vietnam War is an often “forgotten” fact.

Mr. Jang, speaks to the creation of “spies” by the NSA where they coerce false confessions and testimonials from defectors to continue the narrative of the North being a proverbial hell on earth.

…

After Mr. Jang, the North Korean “defectors” are given time to speak. The most notable thing about both of them is that they both wish to return to the North. With the South so often being portrayed as a land of milk and honey when compared to the North the fact that the “defectors” wish to return, expeditiously, does again speak to the narratives about the North not being wholly accurate.

…

It has become a bit of an open secret that defector testimonials are dubious at best. As reported by the Guardian, many of the stories about the North fall apart with a bit of scrutiny. Many stories about the North come from Radio Free Asia which receives funding from the U.S. government and often publishes the most outlandish stories from the North with little to no pushback in the media landscape. And that’s the big thing about the film.

It speaks to the nature of truth in the face of a machine, an empire, that wants the world to believe one thing. It’s a bit bittersweet upon viewing LCPIS. A common notion in the West is the truth will come out. It may be slow but when it arrives it will win. But the nature of propaganda, especially when it has strong financial backing, shows that truth in the modern age is as valuable as the screens it’s read on.

Yeomni Park recounts in vivid detail how she was sold to a mentally ill family in China as sex slaves by a gang of human traffickers

If a girl wants to play a sport for which there is a boys team but not girls team, she must be allowed to try out and participate on the same basis as the boys

Sure. And occasionally you get a girl to qualify. Sarah Fuller as the place kicker for Vanderbilt Commodores, for instance.

But the disparity in builds - particularly in a high contact sport like football - makes women qualifying virtually impossible.

So for example, if you cut funding to a boys team and parents more than make up the shortfall in donations and fundraising, it’s entirely possible based on that you might have to cut it further.

This was in response to early efforts to effectively privatize student athletics and freeze women’s sports out.

I’m sure it’s a matter of time before our current patriarchy fetish SCOTUS to reverse this out. But for the time being, you can’t just find a few mega-donors to create a “Private Men’s Club” on a public campus. What is ultimately being measured is access, which does get nebulous, but is necessarily the case when so many misogynists are intent on digging out loopholes to render Title XI toothless.

If you… uh… like your chunky soups, you can… uh… keep them.

That would be the logical thing to do.

Although, even then no public school should be sponsoring full contact sports, full stop.

It’s been demonstrated within equality movements that statistical biological strength corresponding to sex does not always correspond to actual performance.

Depends heavily on the sport and the quality of coaching. Direct contact sports - football in particular - present real risks to the players when there’s a big disparity in size and strength.

But then there’s an argument that middle/high school contact sports shouldn’t be allowed to begin with, precisely because of the risk of injury.

Title IX requires gender equity in access and spending. It doesn’t strictly require women to access men’s sports, but it does require the school fully fund/admit women to equivalent in the abstract.

So, for instance, if you spend $100k/year on the boys-only football program, you need $100k dedicated to a girl accessible sport (typically volleyball or softball or soccer).

The kids WILL turn everything into a competition

In my experience, it’s the parents that need to make every Little League Rec scrimmage into the final game of the world series.

i think sport, exspecially in schools, should always be mixed

At the middle school age range, girls are typically bigger and stronger than their male peers. Boys don’t catch up until 14-16, at which point they rapidly put on height and mass to exceed their girl peers.

I’ll give you a full rebuttal as soon as I’m done reaching the top shelf and unscrewing the lid of the pickle jar.

Nothing masculine about tepid conformity.

A yearning desire to be indistinguishable from one’s peers and find acceptance in the tribe is peak toxic masculinity.

I’m more of a summer/spring in my color scheme