"TIL i do ~~women~~ people things. lol"
The point of "you don't have to hold your farts in to be a woman" isn't to suggest that only women fart, but that farting is a thing that people do, and that given that women are a subset of people, women fart (and that farting doesn't make someone less of a woman)
There's a balance. I have known plenty of women who felt it was not permissible to fart around people/in public ever. One would not even fart around her husband of 10+ years. Another would only fart when they were at home, in the bathroom. Another felt it was inappropriate to ever fart, even when she was pooping (as a result of this, she once was so constipated that she had to go to the hospital).
Whilst these are particularly extreme examples, they're just instances of a general trend where women farting is stigmatised more than men farting. I interpret the image in the OP to be resisting that excessive pressure and unrealistic standard rather than advocating for disregarding basic courtesy and farting with impunity
"Historically patriarchal" — there are contemporary Japanese politicians who argue that the job of women is literally just to be baby making machines. I struggle to imagine how a "hardliner conservative" female politician could fit into that without being extremely hypocritical.
Edit: Yup, as I expected (source: Associated Press)
"Takaichi has been seen as opposed to all the reforms that advocate for better representation and the position of women in society. The soon-to-be Japanese PM has supported the LDP’s view that women should serve as good mothers and wives. She opposes same-sex marriage, male-only imperial succession reforms, and legal changes allowing married couples to keep separate surnames."
Edit 2: Though I suppose that's very on brand, given that she apparently idolises Margaret Thatcher
I know what we should do to reduce our vulnerability to the kind of "harvest now, encrypt later" cyberattacks that this article mentions: let's weaken our existing encryption by punching a big hole in it. As well as allowing the UK government to violate its own citizens' privacy and continue eroding civil rights, we will also reduce the risk that quantum computers pose.
(This was sarcasm, if it wasn't clear)
What do you mean by "ideological reasons"? You're using the phrase as if it's a bad thing, but I struggle to imagine how anyone could exist in a political role such as FTC chair and not bring their ideology into their work.
Okay, I'll bite. Let's say that Palestinians also need to be deradicalized. Surely the first step should be to stop the ongoing genocide and apartheid?
Thanks for the additional context; I appreciate it. I was already feeling solidarity with Emiru, and I'm glad to learn more from her perspective
"To tell you honestly, I am a lot more hurt and upset by how Twitch handled it during and after the fact."
Man, I hate how hard I relate to this. I'm so used to creepy guys that it often becomes part of the background noise of being in public. I remember the first time I went to a kink nightclub, I was startled by how infrequently I was randomly groped; being in such a consent aware space made me realise how many people in a regular nightclub will use the crowdedness as plausible deniability in trying to cop a feel. That stuff is honestly so prevalent that the individual instances hardly bother me anymore (though thinking about how often it happens and how powerless women are to stop it does get to me)
However, sometimes, something happens that goes beyond this, and makes me feel genuinely unsafe and violated. Often, it's scary because it represents an escalation of harassment, such as a coworker who becomes increasingly invasive. There have been enough times where reporting harassment or an assault has gone ignored (or worse) that now when it happens, I feel desperately anxious in not knowing whether to report a thing.
Beyond the effect of the harassment on me, I feel that it's my ethical duty to report things like this. It would obviously not be feasible to report everything that was sus, but some things cross the line and need to be reported. However, my greatest fear in reporting something is that it may reveal the organisation to be shitty. The betrayal hurts more than the harassment. Even if it's a big company like Twitch, which you wouldn't necessarily expect to be giving a fuck, there's still the desperate hope that "the system" will respond to flagrant violations of codes of conduct (and also the law). It's demoralising when those in power act like sexual harassment and sexual assault don't have laws against them. This undermines the law, and makes it as though it isn't even there.
This is a product of healthcare being treated as a for-profit endeavour. Small healthcare facilities shouldn't need to be profitable (neither should large ones, but as you highlight, economics of scale means that larger facilities do better financially).
The government does have the power to change this, but it would require recalibrating to recognise healthcare as a basic human right
"too dumb to understand code requirements in every industry and profession."
Or selfish. Unfortunately Hanlon's razor can only cut so deep.
Something that I find interesting with Rome is that arguably one of the ways it managed to keep going for so long is that it was continuing to push its borders outwards through conquest. Assimilating a land and its people into the Republic/Empire is one way of dealing with the problem of invading "barbarians" (even if that is just transmuting the problem such that your external threat is a new group of "barbarians", and the old potential invaders potentially pose a threat from within).
Continuing to push outwards is a way to continue developing the military though, and to distract the military from the potential option of seizing power for themselves. There's only so far you can push before the borders you need to secure are too large to do effectively, and the sheer area to be administrated is too large, even for Rome.
As you highlight, it's a common misconception that people don't realise that the Fall of Rome was far more protracted and complex of a process than a single event. I think that's a shame, because I find it so much more interesting that historians can't even agree on when the Fall of Rome even was.
I'm also not sure what I mean by "end apartheid", because I also don't know whether it's realistic in the short term. That would still be the most realistic path to deradicalising Palestine.
A reasonable first step towards that long term goal would be to end the ongoing genocide. It's hard to even speculate about possible futures when each day of needless bloodshed makes future peace more difficult.