The list did. You’re appending to a list.

Wait, where does this not apply to Republicans?

These guys are saying $50-100 but I have seen $200 per month on a $1800 per month apartment. It’s no joke.

There’s no technicality about it. The people that get married are the ones who determine the exclusivity of the marriage.

Like, it’s even dumber than that because if you didn’t have marriage, you’d still have people in exclusive relationships, so wtf are you complaining about?

Sorry we’re not all fucking satire nerds like you who knows words like “serious” or “satire” or “/s”, Poindexter. Some of us make do with whatever solution is available!

Sorry we’re not all fucking math nerds like you who knows words like “significant” or “binary” or “divide”, Poindexter. Some of us make do with whatever solution is available!

Don’t hide behind the shitty half-assed news reports, you coward. Just name the actual Democrat that fired their vaccine board, so we can end this. Just name the actual Democrat that banned abortion federally, instead of posting fifteen useless articles. Just name the Democrat that kept child marriage protected because it’s easier. Just name the Democrat that deported my neighbor, specifically, since you seemed to have known him. Just name the Democrat that implemented a voting suppression measure, assuming you can find one within the last 25 years, instead of you saying that’s the same thing as ranked choice, which have been challenged by Republicans in every single instance (and this is the only instance you found for Democrats, if you could call it that, lol). Just name the Democrat that called queer people slurs openly and wants them tried for child sex crimes.

It should be so easy, right? If they’re the same, just fucking name them.

I don’t remember when the Democrats deported my neighbor or when they called self-proclaimed Nazis good guys or when they wanted to take away food stamps from single mothers or when they wanted to make voting harder or when they didn’t want to ban child marriage or when they wanted to take away the only source of food and housing for children, people with disabilities, and the elderly or when they wanted to ban vaccines or when they wanted to ban abortion or when they wanted to make being queer a child sex crime or when they ignored all of science, but I guess they were just too smart to do any of that.

I always get extra disappointed by the Outer Worlds, because I always confuse it with the Outer Wilds and would rather play that game.

An intersex person is typically assigned a gender at birth, but so is everyone else. Being intersex just means you aren’t biologically male or female (though I think this might also include people who have sex chromosomes that develop as though they were the other binary sex, but I’m not an expert). Most intersex people don’t typically know they are intersex, and thus they would count as cisgender so long as they identify as the gender they were assigned at birth and transgender if they do not. Thus, if someone had, say XY chromosomes, but was assigned female at birth, they would probably be cis if they identified as female.

However, trans can be a bit of a self-identifying label, and thus someone in that situation might just as well consider themselves trans. There’s a lot of different definitions for trans. Many non-binary people would consider themselves trans since they don’t identify as their assigned gender at birth.

Long story short, gender is complicated. Sex doesn’t change (put a couple asterisks here), but gender is super flexible (also asterisks here.)

The second one. It is always the second one.

Everyone has and is that client.

The saying “you can’t butter a fly” is an idiom expressing that someone or something is too difficult to influence or manipulate. It’s rooted in the idea that butterflies, with their delicate nature, are virtually impossible to convince to do anything against their will, let alone “butter” them in a literal sense.

AI can’t even tell how many Rs are in strawberry. I have seen the code AI makes, and it is not almost there. It is quite far away. Give AI 10 years, and it will be “almost there”, and even then it will still be incredibly shit code.

Should’ve cut to an insurance agent denying coverage based on the actuarial table.

It sucks way worse for all those people born in 1488.

Because they’re dead.

Eh, fair enough. I was a bit rude there, but the intent is that while I agree this isn’t a super complex piece of art, I don’t think it needs to be. I would even argue that by making the message as simple as possible, it does what it sets out to do quite well, which is to physically represent the emotions of the author. Maybe they don’t match yours, but that is the subjectivity of it. I know that I would be quite dismissive of other webcomics, but I would likely dismiss it for the subject matter, and not the quality. Webcomics tend to be a fairly simple medium, so I let a lot of things pass for it.

I think you actually don’t like the message of the comic, because if you didn’t like it or thought it was lazy, you would probably move on.

For me, this comic represents my lived experience. I have had people in my life literally say “It’s just politics” and call trans people sexually deviant pedophiles at the same time. And if you haven’t had that happen to you, good for you. But I like the comic because it is simple, short, and pretty good at conveying that feeling.

Sorry if that feels lazy to you, art is subjective, but I think the message of this is pretty fucking obvious because of its simplicity.

That’s a fair point. I suppose that does put onus on people to prove their existence and experience. I can see that as frustrating, and I didn’t intend on making that statement.

The issue at hand, however, is how the OP can determine that trans people even exist, and using the existence of studies is one that is easily acceptable to most people. If your argument is that there should be no need to prove identities so long as no one is harmed, then I believe you are arguing with the wrong person, since that same sentiment was already expressed in my original reply.

Taking your stance is fine to anyone that accepts that these identities harm no one, but that in itself is obviously in contention with too many people. I will argue the easier logic until that is fixed.

I think you misunderstood, but I’m not presupposing otherkin isn’t a thing. I am saying it doesn’t have the same type of intellectual backing as transgender experience does, so it isn’t treated the same. I think that is unfortunate, even if there are studies done as well as expressed experiences, especially within indigenous peoples (and you could argue that is part of the reason fewer studies are done on it.)

I’m not really here to debate whether fish exist because I know fish exist and I can drive to most lakes and find fish in them and I can go to a few museums and see fish remains and I can go to pet stores and find fish for sale and I can go to a grocery store and find fish to eat. Doing that same thing with people and their personal experiences is much harder since it’s more of a personal experience and not, you know, a visible phenomenon, and so it’s going to be harder to convince people a personal experience is real if it’s not their experience and especially if it’s not a common one.