That's literally his campaign website. His platform consists of a bizarre mix of mostly right wing and a few left wing policy planks. He has outlines a manic vision of building a planet-scale maglev train network built with trains 100' wide. And his website is filled with plans to constitutionally outlaw every petty grievance he's ever experienced.
Yeah that's what I figured. I was just really baked last night. This thought came into my head based on a conversation I was having with someone, and I just thought the idea hilarious. Just imagining some guard getting sentenced and going, "wait...I still get to keep my job, right?"
I always remember the classic Microsoft Flight Simulator. In the pre-9/11 days, the game had a helicopter that you could take off from the roof of the World Trade Center. You could only access that takeoff location via a helicopter. However, once the map was loaded, you could switch your aircraft. Our favorite thing to do was to start with a helicopter on top of the WTC, then swap it out for a jumbo jet. All of a sudden you're piloting a 747 trying to take off from a dead stop off the roof of the WTC.
You can apply some common sense though. Women opening bank accounts was not some fringe thing only available to a few in 1975. It was the norm. In a city, the vast majority of banks would be open to women. Maybe there was one old fuddy duddy bank that refused to do it. But the vast majority would.
This is how anti-discrimination laws always work. The only way an anti-discrimination law can pass is if the vast majority of the population is already onboard with it. Laws tend to be passed banning discrimination when the tolerant majority gets tired of putting up with the bullshit of a bigoted minority. Until that threshold is reached, the standard is always "let people and companies decide on their own."
Jim Crow was defeated when the vast majority of the US population had come to the point where they believed racial discrimination was wrong. It was the rest of the society collectively telling white people in south "we're tired of your shit."
If most women in the US could not open a bank account in 1975, then the vast, vast majority of banks must not have been offering them accounts. The only way that would happen is if the vast majority of the population opposed women having bank accounts. And if that was the case, there would have never been the political will necessary to pass an anti-discrimination law. Anti-discrimination laws tend to only be passed when they're banning forms of discrimination the majority already opposes.
The purpose of a system is its outcome. If the elections only ever produced comically landslide victories for the ruling party, then that is a guarantee of a sham election.
Even if you assume every Soviet voter was a full-on true believer Communist, you would still never have such outcomes in fair elections. You would end up with multiple communist parties, each practicing a slightly different flavor of communism, vying for the vote.
Any voting system where the ruling party endlessly wins overwhelming victories is guaranteed corrupt and a sham.
This is a gross over-simplification. The gender pay gap in the USSR was larger than that of the US in the 1970s. In other words, the US had better pay equality than the USSR. And they managed to do that in a planned economy where all the wages were directly set by the government!
It's more complex than this. First, obviously the bank account thing is a myth. When people cite that women couldn't open a bank account, they're mostly referring to the date that a law was passed that prevented banks from discriminating against women. Plenty of banks were already doing business with women. The law just required all banks to do so. Hell, the first bank for women in the US was opened in 1879. It was still a very important victory to have anti-discrimination laws passed. But if a woman wanted to get a bank account in the 1950s or 1960s US, she could.
But more critically, as the article I linked notes, the Soviet Union was not a paradise for women's equality. Here's the polit bureau in 1975:
But beyond top leadership, the problems were more fundamental. Yes, the Soviets were an immense improvement over what came before in terms of women's liberation. But women's liberation in the USSR was never a cultural movement like it was in the US. The party opened up some career opportunities that were previously closed to women. And cosmonaut was a high-profile example. But in the 1970s, the Soviet Union had a higher gender pay gap than the US.
Ugh. Tell me about it. My beau has been recovering from a weightlifting back injury for several weeks. Been unable to do anything beyond just hand work. I really want him to heal to feel better. But also.... :3
Still waiting for one brave soul to undergo the combined phalloplasty/vaginoplasty. That's where they first take your existing dick and surgically transform it into a vag and vulva. Then they take a piece of your arm skin and construct a replacement dick for some reason.
It’s super interesting because some of the changes I’ve seen trans folk report are things that are rarely, if ever, documented in scientific literature.
I mean, what exactly is wrong with it? Age gap aside, I really don't see anything wrong with say a young faculty member getting with an undergrad. Imagibe a prof in their late twenties and an undergrad in their early twenties. As long as the student isn't one of their current or likely future students, I see nothing morally wrong with it. Now if it's a 50 year old prof with a 19 year old student, that's a different matter. But the problem there is the age gap, not the prof/student status.
Yeah it's a blessing and a curse. It's a curse in that there's no easy fix. You can't just sit back and let hormones change your voice, at least not for trans gals. And it is just so so much work. As a blessing though, it's one of the few things that actually can be changed through sheer effort alone. There's no willing away beard shadow, for instance. And if you are able to master a feminine voice, it does wonders for passing.
I think Martin Ward may have him beat on crazy.
https://www.theprinceofpeace.net/
That's literally his campaign website. His platform consists of a bizarre mix of mostly right wing and a few left wing policy planks. He has outlines a manic vision of building a planet-scale maglev train network built with trains 100' wide. And his website is filled with plans to constitutionally outlaw every petty grievance he's ever experienced.