If you enjoy reading, !Books@Lemmy.world is pretty active place to discuss what you’re reading and review it or get recommendations.

I try to post significant price drops routinely to !ebookdeals@literature.cafe as well. I mostly post ones that I have heard good things about / read myself and really enjoyed and are valid at all 3 big US ebook retailers, Kobo, Barnes & Noble, and Amazon at the same time or Humble Bundles. There’s no rule against others posting deals they endorse for other regions or other books, I just wanted to avoid it being a firehouse of spammy links and I only shop US Stores.

‘Nother day, ‘nother dollar…

Sometimes things aren’t your fault but are your problem. And men making excuses like “just locker room talk” and not confronting other men in their lives who do or say toxic things or espouse ideas or personalities that generally make women uncomfortable are our problems, whether or not they are our fault.

I know. It just seemed to me that their influence began to ramp up even more (perhaps that was just my local troop though) when the LDS Church started paying registrations and activities fees in the early 90s but it truthfully happened slowly like boiling a frog over a long time.

In the US they never dropped the mandatory overtures to religiosity. In fact, there was a period in the 90s-early 2000s where one sizable religious group who had replaced their prior youth organization with the BSA got pretty involved at the national level to the detriment of the program as a whole. While it’s not really required in any real sense at the troop level, you do have to affirm a belief in some “higher power” as an adult volunteer. (I’m an Eagle Scout and now atheist)

In Sweden, the Svenska Scoutförbundet was an outgrowth from the original UK scouting movement, but I don’t know how big it was/is.

Alternatively, instant Bear Calvary.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1149

Less risk of computer viruses, higher risk of bird flu though.

There’s a bunch of these huge warehouse-like caves in Missouri, some are more natural, but many have been developed. They are super valuable because of the natural climate consistency.

An example near Kansas City: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SubTropolis

Because that’s how she’s told people she prefers to be called, that’s how she still brands her social media.

People respecting somebody else’s choice for how to refer to them is literally the example that is the worst for your argument.

This wiki page, not itself as an original source but as a collection of original papers in the references for you to peruse at your leisure is a great starting point. But your question is a bit like the “Did you know Aristotle never said ‘Thank You’? Mostly because he didn’t speak English.” Joke. You are expecting modern accommodations and language in texts from a different era that would have used unfamiliar forms or language like ancient Egypt that had a 3rd gender “sekhet”.

What’s up with people changing their names after marriage or adoption too‽

Why does everyone refer to her as Marie Curie instead of Maria Skłodowska? It’s just soo unnecessarily complicated to have to use a different name than the one assigned at birth.

Not everyone can do that and those who do function in that system dont have that much incentive to improve it.

Aside from those who are incarcerated, not documented/housed citizens, or too young to be able to knowledgeably participate, can you help me understand why someone can’t otherwise participate via volunteering time/money, organizing, or voting for those who do support changing the system in positive ways?

You’re not wrong, the problem is that the binary division was created when the initial constitution was written. And we have to function within the structure of the system as it exists now in order to improve it.

The system today suffers from a bunch of ideological debt over decades and centuries and there is a significant faction that likes that debt just the way it is because it benefits them.

One party is trying to do that and replace it with an authoritarian oligarchy, the other is trying to maintain a democracy and often improve how representative it is.

Because our first-past-the-post presidential system makes it so that it is exceptionally unlikely that any one not affiliated with the 2 largest parties can get any level of support at the federal level.

If we had a semi-parliamentary system where power was vested in the group that had the most votes in the assembly, you could see more jockeying for third parties at lower levels that still caucuses with one of the two primary parties. But as long as we have separate branches and a system where you have to get 50%+1 vote, we will only ever have 2 parties.

So instead of providing one example, your response is “do your own research”?

Ok.

Not meaningfully in a first past the post vote. Ranked choice or some other alternative, then sure…

Ah, you’re privileged enough to think you’re insulated from any actual consequences of the election and fuck those other people, right?

Cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool…

I was confused about how a network cable was going to kill people for a hot second there.