#Legal Representative China

[neil-gaiman]

I found myself having, not exactly an argument recently, but a highly opinionated conversation with someone who did not believe my assertion that once upon a time there were official Hello Kitty vibrators. With the aid of the Wayback Machine, I found this article, and thought the world at large might enjoy it too...

Here's the text of the article:

The history of the Hello Kitty vibrator

By Peter Payne October 4, 2004

Sanrio is one of the top character licensors in the world, having more or less created the business model of doing business by creating something that doesn't really exist and licensing its use to other companies. Sanrio produces nothing -- all their characters, like the Little Twin Star, Minna no Ta-bo, Bad Batz-Maru, exist as legal entities and nothing more. Their most successful character, Hello Kitty, or Kitty-chan as she's known in Japan, is now now thirty years old.

One of the many companies that license Sanrio's characters for their products was a Japanese company called Genyo Co. Ltd. Genyo made a wide variety of products, from bento boxes to children's toys to chopsticks, many with the Hello Kitty character on them. They scored big in the late 1990's with an off-the-wall hit, a series of Hello Kitty toys which featured a different Kitty figure from each of Japan's 47 prefectures, each representing something the prefecture was famous for. (The figure from Gunma Prefecture, where we live, represented a wooden kokeshi doll.)

In 1997, Genyo designed a product that would live in infamy: the Hello Kitty vibrating shoulder massager, which really is a shoulder massager (trust us -- it says so on the package). Sanrio approved this design without batting an eye, and the product enjoyed modest sales in toy shops and in family restaurants like Denny's and Coco's. It wasn't until 1999 or so that people began to catch on to the fact that the Hello Kitty massager had other potential uses, and with amazing speed, they started popping up in adult videos in Japan. The next thing anyone knew, they had changed into a cult adult item, sold in vending machines in love hotels -- after all, what self-respecting man wouldn't buy his girl a Hello Kitty vibrator when she asked him for one?

The emergence of the Hello Kitty vibrator as a cult adult item caused friction between Sanrio and Genyo, and Sanrio ordered the company to stop making the units. Genyo refused, since it had paid a lot of money to license Kitty for their products. There seemed nothing Sanrio could do, since they had approved the item for sale (see the official Sanrio sticker on the boxes). The answer came when the Japanese tax authorities raided Genyo on suspicion of tax evasion. It seems that some creative accounting was going on between the president of the company, a Mr. Nakamura, his vice president, and the owner of the factory in China where the units were made. All three were arrested, and Sanrio had the excuse needed to yank Genyo's license. They seized the molds used to make the vibrators and destroyed them.

And so, the sad, weird chapter of the Hello Kitty vibrator is at an end. The last of the Kitty vibes are gone, so now what will the world do for wacky comic -- and sexual -- relief?

[apas-95]

I have a question that’s probably pretty stupid, but I thought I’d ask someone knowledgeable. I know china is nothing like how it’s painted by imperialism, but the “social credit” system that affects people’s lives and privileges is real right? A lot of people online default to it for the argument towards china being terrible in one way or another, and from what I know it seems like a legitimately bad thing used to punish or censor people. Do I have this wrong? I’m sure there’s more to the story

In brief, while the 'social credit system' exists, it's both fairly regional (as lots of things are in China, everywhere is constantly experimenting and trialling different paths), and generally applies only to corporations, and the rich. Western reporting likes to act as though they're talking to fellow rich people, which obfuscates things - when they say 'your social credit score can stop you from getting plane tickets' they mean 'if you've committed acts of embezzlement or corruption you can't get first-class tickets and have to fly economy with everyone else'.

In the vast majority of cases the system is aimed solely at corporations and regards things like not paying social security benefits and the like. China doesn't have a FICO-like credit system as the US does, because most Chinese people aren't debtors. People in China generally don't go into debt to buy things, they save up (because the Chinese economy is based on the sale of production, rather than the sale of debts, like the US economy). Before this system was established there lacked a unified system of punishments for non-criminal corporate violations.

That's why the western businesses, which own the western news outlets, were very upset about this, and painted it as they did. They complain about stricter regulations anywhere, but for China they get to piggyback off of existing sentiment to get people who otherwise would support these types of regulations to oppose them. The 'environmental pollution regulations are tyrannical government overreach' line goes down a lot smoother when people have already bought into a story of 'authoritarianism'.

Here's some reporting from western sources backing this up:

Contrary to common belief, the cities mainly target companies, not individuals. Nonetheless, legal representatives of a violating company are also included in the blacklists to prevent reoffending elsewhere or under a different company. Nationally, about 75 percent of entities targeted by the system end up on blacklists because of court orders they have ignored—the so-called judgment defaulters. The remaining companies are typically collared for severe marketplace violations—for instance, for food safety infringements, environmental damage, or wage arrears.

[nationallawreview]

USTR Seeks Comments on Section 301 Tariffs on Chinese Goods; Portal Opens Nov. 15

USTR Seeks Comments on Section 301 Tariffs on Chinese Goods; Portal Opens Nov. 15

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced Oct. 17 that starting Nov. 15, it will begin soliciting comments on the effectiveness of Section 301 tariffs the Trump administration placed on Chinese goods. The notice and request for comments relate to USTR’s ongoing four-year statutory review of the Section 301 investigation of China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to…

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Week - September 11, 2023

Sorry for not sending last week's issue as I got covid again :/ I passed it, so here's the best things that happened last week :)

1. The IRS plans to crack down on 1,600 millionaires to collect millions of dollars in back taxes

The IRS announced on Friday it is launching an effort to aggressively pursue 1,600 millionaires and 75 large business partnerships that owe hundreds of millions of dollars in past due taxes. The newly announced tax collection effort will begin as soon as October. “We have more hiring to do,” Werfel said. “It’s going to be a very busy fall for us.”

2. The NGO African Parks announced it would purchase the world’s largest population of privately owned white rhinos

Africa’s beleaguered rhinos have been thrown a significant lifeline with the announcement that nearly 2,000 semi-wild rhinos owned by South African rhino breeder John Hume will be “rewilded” into reserves across South Africa and other parts of the continent over the next 10 years.

3. Mexico supreme court decriminalizes abortion across country

Mexico’s supreme court has unanimously ruled that state laws prohibiting abortion are unconstitutional and violate women’s rights, in the latest in a series of victories for reproductive rights activists across Latin America.

Wednesday’s ruling came two years after the court ordered the northern state of Coahuila to remove sanctions for abortion from its criminal code, a decision which prompted a tortuous state-by-state process of legal battles. So far 12 of Mexico’s 31 states have decriminalized the procedure.

4. The first human organ created inside an animal opens the door to manufacturing ‘spare parts’ for people

It is a historic image. A team of researchers in China has successfully generated a blueprint of a human organ in another animal for the first time. The experiment, conducted with humanized kidneys in pig embryos, represents a step toward the still-distant dream of using other mammals as source of organs for transplants.

5. Study Shows a Single Dose of Psilocybin's Astonishing Impact on Depression and Could Change Medical Treatments of Mental Health Forever

Psychedelics are making a comeback, and this time, they're dressed in the respectable garb of clinical research. Recent studies have reignited interest in these substances, particularly psilocybin, the active compound in magic mushrooms, as a potent treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD).

6. Missing cat reunited with owner after it disappeared during Alaska flooding

Twenty-six days after he went missing, an adorable black and white cat named Leo has been reunited with his family. Brave Leo went missing after historic glacial flooding swept away his home and all his owner's belongings.

7. Dogs perform Mozart with orchestra in Denmark

A classical music festival in Copenhagen, Denmark, has opened with some canine additions to the orchestra.

---

That's it for this week :)

This newsletter will always be free. If you liked this post you can support me with a small kofi donation here:

Buy me a coffee ❤️

Also don’t forget to reblog this post with your friends.

[rainbowsky]

Important LGBTQ Legal Ruling in China

A court in China has recognized the visitation rights of a same-sex partner in a custody dispute. This is a huge milestone in China, and represents the first time a Chinese court has ever acknowledged that a child can have two parents of the same sex.

The case involved two women who were married in the US, and each had fetuses implanted using eggs from one of the women. They each gave birth to a child that were both genetically linked to only one of the mothers.

After returning to China their relationship fell apart and they split up, but because the complainant had given birth to one of the children her rights as a mother are being recognized with respect to that child (she still has no rights to see the other child).

This is a far cry from same-sex marriage or legal adoption for same-sex couples, but it is definitely a notable moment in the evolution of LGBTQ rights in China.

[misfitwashere]

The Neighbor's House is on Fire

You have a good neighbor.  He does a lot for you.  He keeps the street clean around your house.  He mows your lawn when you are away.  He signs for your packages and brings them to you later.  Your kids go and play with his kids in the backyard.  He has an alarm on his house with a camera, which you don't, and he once ran burglars away from your house.  He's done a thing or two for you that you haven't noticed.  Like the time he stopped a crew from mistakenly taking down a tree in your front yard.  And the time he found your cat outside, on the street, and gave it to your kid.

And now your neighbor's house has caught fire.  The flames are just now visible.  There's plenty of time to react.  In fact, you happen to be standing nearby, at exactly the right place, watering your garden, with a hose in your hand.  The flames are in easy reach.  Your neighbor runs to you and asks you to just turn the water in the direction of the flame. 

You refuse.  You turn off the water and walk away.  And then you hurry down to your basement and shut off the valve, just to make sure your neighbor can't be helped. 

All you had do was flick your wrist, turn the hose in the right direction.  But you didn't.  It wouldn't have cost you anything.  A nickel on your water bill that you wouldn't notice. 

And if you had helped, you'd have been a hero.  Your neighbor would remember you, as would the press, as would your kids, as would everyone.  But you chose not to help.  Your neighbor's house burns down. 

And then yours does, too.

This is, currently, our Ukraine policy. We are choosing to let a good neighbor burn.  Ukraine does things for us that we need, and often that we neglect to do ourselves, or cannot do ourselves.  It does things for us that we do not notice. 

These are not small things.  By resisting Russia, Ukraine shows the world that there are people who care about democracy enough to take risks for it.  It reduces the risk of nuclear proliferation and nuclear war by showing that nuclear blackmail does not work.  It maintains the international legal order.  It fulfills the NATO mission by absorbing and reversing a Russian attack, making war elsewhere in Europe very unlikely.  It deters China from risky action in the Pacific by showing how difficult offensive operations are. 

These are all hugely important American interests, most of which we cannot fulfill ourselves.  Ukraine can fulfill them, if we help, just a little, in ways we would not even notice.

Ukraine is on fire.  In the past few days, Russia has launched something like five hundred rockets and drones at Ukrainian civilians, including nearly a hundred drones on New Year's Eve.  Russia continues to undertake offensive operations in Ukraine.  Russian propagandists and Russian leaders continue to announce the same genocidal war aims now as at the beginning of the war: the end of the Ukrainian state and the end of the Ukrainian nation.  Ukrainian citizens under Russian occupation continue to be tortured and deported.  

Ukraine resists, very effectively, with the weapons it has.  It has opened the Black Sea to trade, something that no one expected.  It is holding back the Russian advance, inflicting huge casualties.  It is shooting down missiles and drones.  (If you want to help detect the drones, which is a matter of urgency, please make a contribution to my Safe Skies campaign here).

So we are standing here with easy access to water.  It would be so easy to help.  And yet we are turning away from our neighbor in need.  Ukraine needs our support, and some of our Congressional representatives are blocking it.

The amount in question is not meaningful, given what we spend on national security.  It is about a nickel on the defense budget dollar.  

And that nickel is extremely well spent!  The defense department budget, after all, is meant to keep us safe.  That nickel on the dollar brings us security in the Atlantic and the Pacific, it brings us a reduced risk of nuclear war and a greatest international respect for law, it brings us the sense that we have friends who take risks for good things.  There is no other nickel on the defense department dollar that is nearly so important as this one. 

And, in fact, we don't even really spend that nickel on Ukraine.  Most of the defense money we nominally spend on Ukraine actually stays in the United States.  The arms Ukraine needs are in large measure weapons that your tax dollars would otherwise be spent to decommission -- to destroy and throw away.  For example, we have about a thousand long-range missiles that we will soon pay tax money to take apart and drop in landfills.  Those missiles, given instead to Ukraine, would seriously hinder Russian attacks, and put Ukraine in a position to win the war.

We are turning off the water.  Running down to then basement, caught in some strange self-destructive fit of self-absorption, we are putting our own house at risk.  Ignoring our neighbor is the worst thing we can do, even if all we care about is ourselves. 

Everything that the Ukrainians are doing for us can be undone this year.  Russia can win, and be encouraged to start other wars, where our participation is likely to be much more direct.  China can be encouraged, and we can find ourselves in a cataclysm over Taiwan.  International order can break down, and we can confront confusing, difficult, and painful conflicts all over the world.  Russia can halt food deliveries to Asia and Africa, leading to starvation and further war.  Everyone can be demoralized by the realization that those who risked their lives for democracy were sold out, just because Americans lacked the wherewithal to what is obviously the right thing.

It doesn't have to be that way.  It's easy to help a good neighbor.  This is a conflagration that we can stop with a flick of the wrist.  A bit of legislation to support Ukraine, and we all have a safer year, and safer lives.

© 2024 Timothy Snyder

[reality-detective]

"Follow the yellow brick road" basically means follow the money, which I've been trying to tell you for years..♥️

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

The wonderful wizard of oz🤔.

"The Wizard of Oz = Ounces of Gold. The Yellow Brick Road = Bricks or Gold Ingot.

The Straw Man represents that fictional ALL CAPS legal fiction — PERSON. The Straw Man wanted a Brain but got a Certificate — the Birth Certificate for a new legal creation & he was proud of his new legal status, plus all these other legalisms he was granted.

The Tin Man — (TIN) Taxpayer Identification Number, a robotic avatar, who worked tirelessly until his body literally froze up & stopped functioning. The heartless & emotionless robot creature who worked himself to death because he had no heart or soul. He wanted a HEART.

The Cowardly Lion was a bully, but was a true coward when someone stood up to him. He lacks true courage. That was what he wanted — Courage. At the end, the Wizard gave him an Official Recognition Award — Authority & Status.

The Wizard of Oz — uses magic, smoke, flames & holograms, but all of it were tricks & illusions to push fear & compliance into doing what he commanded. — The TRUTH is the Wizard have NO real power & only uses illusions to create FALSE power & authority.

The Wicked Witch — pushed fear through intimidation. She was after Toto. She controlled the flying monkey police — the policy enforcers— the mischievous demons, which also represents the BAR Association attorneys who attack & control all the little people for the Great Crown Wizard, the crooked Bankers of Oz - Gold.

In the field of poppies, they were not REAL humans, so drugs had no effect on them, but Dorothy was drugged. The Wizard of Oz was written at the time when the Rockefeller & pharmaceutical begin to take over the medicine & education — the DRUGGING of America. The Crown was the largest drug dealers & after their take-over of drug distribution in China, they began to expand all around the world.

Toto the Dog — was what the Wicked Witch was after. Toto in Latin means ‘in total, all TOGETHER’. Toto was the One who exposed the Wizard of Oz. Toto had no fear & was very small compared to the Great Wizard so no one noticed him. Toto pulled the curtain on the Wizard & his magical scams. ‘Curtain’ also means the End of an Act or scene — The End. He pulled the curtain & started barking until others paid attention & Red Pill the others.

The curtain ‘VEIL’ that hides the corporate legal fiction & its false courts is exposed. The jig is up. No matter how small your bark is — it can be heard. 🗣🗣🗣

THE REAL MEANING OF THE WIZARD OF OZ

I Am.

You Are.

We Are... Oneness.

Universal Consciousness... 🤔

[mariacallous]

The European Union today agreed on the details of the AI Act, a far-reaching set of rules for the people building and using artificial intelligence. It’s a milestone law that, lawmakers hope, will create a blueprint for the rest of the world.

After months of debate about how to regulate companies like OpenAI, lawmakers from the EU’s three branches of government—the Parliament, Council, and Commission—spent more than 36 hours in total thrashing out the new legislation between Wednesday afternoon and Friday evening. Lawmakers were under pressure to strike a deal before the EU parliament election campaign starts in the new year.

“The EU AI Act is a global first,” said European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen on X. “[It is] a unique legal framework for the development of AI you can trust. And for the safety and fundamental rights of people and businesses.”

The law itself is not a world-first; China’s new rules for generative AI went into effect in August. But the EU AI Act is the most sweeping rulebook of its kind for the technology. It includes bans on biometric systems that identify people using sensitive characteristics such as sexual orientation and race, and the indiscriminate scraping of faces from the internet. Lawmakers also agreed that law enforcement should be able to use biometric identification systems in public spaces for certain crimes.

New transparency requirements for all general purpose AI models, like OpenAI's GPT-4, which powers ChatGPT, and stronger rules for “very powerful” models were also included. “The AI Act sets rules for large, powerful AI models, ensuring they do not present systemic risks to the Union,” says Dragos Tudorache, member of the European Parliament and one of two co-rapporteurs leading the negotiations.

Companies that don’t comply with the rules can be fined up to 7 percent of their global turnover. The bans on prohibited AI will take effect in six months, the transparency requirements in 12 months, and the full set of rules in around two years.

Measures designed to make it easier to protect copyright holders from generative AI and require general purpose AI systems to be more transparent about their energy use were also included.

“Europe has positioned itself as a pioneer, understanding the importance of its role as a global standard setter,” said European Commissioner Thierry Breton in a press conference on Friday night.

Over the two years lawmakers have been negotiating the rules agreed today, AI technology and the leading concerns about it have dramatically changed. When the AI Act was conceived in April 2021, policymakers were worried about opaque algorithms deciding who would get a job, be granted refugee status or receive social benefits. By 2022, there were examples that AI was actively harming people. In a Dutch scandal, decisions made by algorithms were linked to families being forcibly separated from their children, while students studying remotely alleged that AI systems discriminated against them based on the color of their skin.

Then, in November 2022, OpenAI released ChatGPT, dramatically shifting the debate. The leap in AI’s flexibility and popularity triggered alarm in some AI experts, who drew hyperbolic comparisons between AI and nuclear weapons.

That discussion manifested in the AI Act negotiations in Brussels in the form of a debate about whether makers of so-called foundation models such as the one behind ChatGPT, like OpenAI and Google, should be considered as the root of potential problems and regulated accordingly—or whether new rules should instead focus on companies using those foundational models to build new AI-powered applications, such as chatbots or image generators.

Representatives of Europe’s generative AI industry expressed caution about regulating foundation models, saying it could hamper innovation among the bloc’s AI startups. “We cannot regulate an engine devoid of usage,” Arthur Mensch, CEO of French AI company Mistral, said last month. “We don’t regulate the C [programming] language because one can use it to develop malware. Instead, we ban malware.” Mistral’s foundation model 7B would be exempt under the rules agreed today because the company is still in the research and development phase, Carme Artigas, Spain's Secretary of State for Digitalization and Artificial Intelligence, said in the press conference.

The major point of disagreement during the final discussions that ran late into the night twice this week was whether law enforcement should be allowed to use facial recognition or other types of biometrics to identify people either in real time or retrospectively. “Both destroy anonymity in public spaces,” says Daniel Leufer, a senior policy analyst at digital rights group Access Now. Real-time biometric identification can identify a person standing in a train station right now using live security camera feeds, he explains, while “post” or retrospective biometric identification can figure out that the same person also visited the train station, a bank, and a supermarket yesterday, using previously banked images or video.

Leufer said he was disappointed by the “loopholes” for law enforcement that appeared to have been built into the version of the act finalized today.

European regulators’ slow response to the emergence of social media era loomed over discussions. Almost 20 years elapsed between Facebook's launch and the passage of the Digital Services Act—the EU rulebook designed to protect human rights online—taking effect this year. In that time, the bloc was forced to deal with the problems created by US platforms, while being unable to foster their smaller European challengers. “Maybe we could have prevented [the problems] better by earlier regulation,” Brando Benifei, one of two lead negotiators for the European Parliament, told WIRED in July. AI technology is moving fast. But it will still be many years until it’s possible to say whether the AI Act is more successful in containing the downsides of Silicon Valley’s latest export.

[kendrixtermina]

The grimy, racist core of the "but Hamas" thing is not that Hamas is like secretly all perfect rainbow sparkles wonderful, but that Palestinians are expected to have a perfect flawless government before their desire for self-determination & right to resist are taken seriously

Somehow past violence disqualifies Palestinian authorities (at least those that won't be stooges) but it is NEVER treated as invalidating Israel's credibility though they did all the same violence and more ten times over, and also, they STARTED it.

Palestinians are held to an impossible standard.

Or its not even that, because the west bank government became Vichy France level stooges & that didn't lead to a Palestinian state, it was used to prevent that. It's a rigged, no win game.

Hamas (which is only one leading faction in a larger coalition of Palestinian resistance fighters that includes socialists as well) doesn't need to be perfect for Palestinians to have a right to self-determination & to resist occupation.

After all its not like western governments are perfect... far from it... and the Israeli government & military are a heart of darkness and a wretched hive of sin, theres no other way to put what I've learned from all the books, documentaries & tentimonies I've been looking at over the last few weeks as well as the real time events unfolding. There is no evil they wont stoop to.

It's the same basic flaw that creates problematic legal grey zones in USA reservations - can't give the "savages" juristiction over "our" citizens so you can just go in there & do a crime. Or the original sin of the UN, which is the veto power.

The rich countries need to finally stop acting like they are by default the adults at the table even if they're acting like toddlers.

All the world is for Palestine! All the world. This includes most ppl under 40 in the West, just that our shitty old man politicians don't represent us. But overwhelmingly most UN states voted to censure Israel time & time again & the USA keeps protecting them. All the world is against this! They're not all stupid. The USA is not more enlightened. They're just another self-serving superpower just like China & Russia. Yes those regimes suck - but the USA sucks! And ppl in India & Africa do admire China for making cheap tech products accessible to less rich countries. The USA (& by extension most the leadership of the western block) is letting Israel do every conceivable evil right now, there IS no moral high ground.

Time we had real equality. Time we expunged the last vestiges of colonialism. In the UN, in western countries, and in occupied Palestine, where it is the strongest.

[ace-hell]

So... Palestine:

-is an actual ethnostate

-Has no REAL freedom of religion

-violate woman rights

-... Violate HUMAN rights...

-was proven to use schools, houses and hospitals as terror base with weapons- which are war crimes

-kidnapped people-again, war crime

-makes missiles out water pipes... AGAIN a WAR crime

-bombed a children section in a hospital in south israel. AND YET AGAIN🙌🏻 A WAR CRIME

-Tried to bomb al aqsa like 2 or 3 times

-Genociding their christian community(im not even talking what would've happen to the jewish communities if they had any)

-literally ripped jewish people to shreds and walked around with their organs and celebrated it like its some kind of barbaric pagan human sacrifice from 2,000 years ago

-Has gender apartheid

-Homophobic as fUck with legal death punishment for queer people

-Antisemic like nazi germany

-Fought WITH the nazis

-Still support nazism, do the nazi salute, sell hitlers book, protest with swastikas, has stores under his name bc(and i quote a palestinian from the west back) "he has killed the most jews"

-advocates for murder of the "cursed" jews since childhood and teaches little kids to be shahid terrorists since VERY young age

-has a corrupt government like pakistan

-was proven to lie about hospital bombing, rape in al shifa and show pictures of victims of the syrian, armenian, afghanistan, iraqi and other wars and claim that they are all palestinians

-claimed that england stole the big ben from them💀

-claims that the flag of England represents palestine💀

-is supported by north korea, russia, south africa, yemen, china and iran: all apartheid states with corrupt dictators that violate human rights

-literally call black palestinians "slaves" (abeed)

-would rather film their kids getting blown to pieces than take them to a safe place

-celebrates the 9/11

-celebrated when hezbolla killed 12 druze kids

-hates the israeli druze

-hates israeli palestinians

-rape

-still do honor killing

-start all the wars since 1900's and then cry about them,,..,, like bffr💀

-their journalists were proven to be part of any terrorist group(either hamas, PFLP(ehem ehem bisan) or pij)

-A lot of their doctors have a certificate of being hamas members

Like sheesh even if i was anti israeli anti zionist no way in HELL would i support palestine as a country💀

[simply-ivanka]

Germany Should Have Listened to Trump

Tuesday 2.27.2024 Wall Street Journal

By Walter Russell Mead

Trump was right about Berlin’s self-defense and risky energy dependence on Russia.

The lower house of Germany’s Parliament voted to legalize the recreational use of cannabis last week. It was a timely move. Germany’s leadership class is going to need all the mellow it can find in a world that isn’t going Germany’s way.

Russian advances in Ukraine and American paralysis over the next aid package are reinforcing the reality that Germany needs to defend itself but lacks the power to do so. So are developments in the Red Sea, where German manufacturers must cope with shipping delays as the Biden administration fails to keep the vital waterway clear.

Forget the 2% of gross domestic product that Germany has repeatedly promised and failed to spend on defense. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius shocked many observers this month when he said that in the new world situation, Germany may have to spend as much as 3.5% of GDP for defense.

The economic news is also grim. Last year Germany’s GDP shrank 0.3%, and last week the government slashed 2024 growth estimates to a pitiful 0.2%. Economists expect negative growth during the first quarter of 2024, placing the country in recession. The outlook for housing is bleak, with business confidence reaching all-time lows. The news in manufacturing is little better. This month the widely followed HCOB German Flash Composite Purchasing Managers’ Index fell to 46.1, the eighth month in a row that the index has pointed to decreasing economic activity.

Energy prices are a particular sore spot. The chemical giant BASF announced €1 billion in spending cuts in its German operations, blaming a mix of weak demand in the German market and “structurally higher energy prices.” Enormous U.S. subsidies under the so-called Inflation Reduction Act are leading German companies to look across the Atlantic.

Chinese competition is another massive worry. China long ago passed Germany as the world’s largest car producer. Increasingly, especially in electric vehicles, it is challenging Germany as both a low-cost and high-quality manufacturer. Beijing aims to marginalize German capital goods and automobile companies in China while Chinese exporters challenge German dominance in world markets.

With the associations representing the small and medium-size Mittelstand firms that make up the heart of the German economy warning in a rare joint open letter about Germany’s loss of competitiveness, Economy Minister Robert Habeck isn’t mincing words. The economy is in “rough waters.” The “competitiveness of Germany as an industrial location” is in doubt.

It isn’t all doom and gloom. The outlook for the service sector is brighter than for manufacturing, and as the Journal reported last week, the Ifo Institute’s business-climate index improved slightly this month. The best that can be said for the outlook? “The German economy is stabilizing at a low level,” according to Ifo’s president.

Meanwhile, Germany’s dysfunctional three-party coalition government is paralyzed by internal struggles. The largest party in the coalition, Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), is deeply divided over foreign policy, with many nostalgic for good relations with Russia and allergic to military spending. The SPD also wants Biden-like government spending initiatives to revive the German industrial machine and expand social benefits. The Greens, the next-largest party, are by German standards foreign-policy hawks but continue to press for a rapid energy transition that drives up costs for business and consumers. The third party in the coalition, the Free Democrats, wants to hold the line on government spending. As if this weren’t enough trouble, the conservative opposition parties have a blocking minority in Parliament’s upper house.

This is not where Germans thought they would be. Sixteen months ago, I visited Berlin and heard from a stream of government officials, think tankers and economists that everything was working fine. Russia was failing in Ukraine. The energy transition would boost German competitiveness and employment. Germany’s Mittelstand would handle anything China could throw at it.

Under the circumstances, it’s no surprise that antiestablishment parties are growing in Germany. The far right Alternative for Germany (AfD) currently has more support than any of the governing parties, with one recent poll showing the AfD at 19%, the Social Democrats at 14%, the Greens at 13%, and the Free Democrats at 4%.

The most bitter pill of all for Germany’s establishment may be the realization that on the most important issues facing Germany, Donald Trump was right where they were wrong. Getting in bed with Vladimir Putin for cheap energy was both foolish and deeply disloyal to the West. German defense policy was self-defeating and dangerous. China wasn’t a reliable partner.

“Ich bin ein Berliner,” was President John F. Kennedy’s message to Germany. If Donald Trump returns to the White House, his message will likely be “Das habe ich gleich gesagt,” or “I told you so.”

[svt-sunnie]

! ♪ . *. ⋆ say the name : *✧･ﾟ: ?

BASIC INFO . . . ✿

birth name — bei yu ming (贝玉明)

korean name — bae yu-min (배유민)

name meaning . . . ✿ —

yu ming : from chinese origins meaning ‘jade brightness’ formed with chinese characters,

玉 (yú) meaning ‘jade, gem’ and 明 (míng) meaning ‘bright, clear, light’ .

nicknames . . . ✿ — sun ( by seventeen ), misun ( by seventeen & carats ), ming ming ( by her siblings ), worldwide beauty ( by knetz ), carats older sister ( by carats )

birthdate . . . ✿ — march 7, 1998

zodiac sign . . . ✿ — pisces

birthplace . . . ✿ — wuhan, china

hometown . . . ✿ — wuhan, china

ethnicity . . . ✿ — chinese

nationality . . . ✿ — chinese

languages . . . ✿ —

. mandarin : 97%

. korean : 75%

. english : 63%

. cantonese : 58%

height . . . ✿ — 172 cm ( 5’8 )

blood type . . . ✿ — A+

hair color . . . ✿ — black (natural)

eye color . . . ✿ — dark brown

claims . . . ✿ —

. face : handong (deukae), cheng xiao, other chinese idols

. vocal : ningning ( aespa )

. rap : irene ( red velvet )

. dance : yves ( loona )

gender . . . ✿ — female

pronouns . . . ✿ — she/her

sexual orientation . . . ✿ — unlabeled

relationship status . . . ✿ — dating ( est. 2020 )

! ♪ . *. ⋆ network love: *✧･ﾟ: ?

CAREER . . . ✿

stage name — sunnie

hangul — 수니

company . . . ✿ — pledis ent. (2012 - 2024) diva labels (2024 - present)

trainee period . . . ✿ — 3 years (2012 - 2015)

debut age . . . ✿ — 17 (int.) 18 (kor.)

group . . . ✿ — seventeen

subunits . . . ✿ — vocal team

position . . . ✿ — main vocalist, dancer, fotg

representative emoji . . . ✿ — 🍓/☀️

fandom name . . . ✿ — ttalmingies

ranking . . . ✿ —

. vocal : 10/10

. rap : 5/10

. dance : 8.5/10

. stage presence : 8/10

. acting : 8.9/10

. producing : 7/10

. songwriting : 8.6/10

. leadership : 1.5/10

. public speaking : 4/10

! ♪ . *. ⋆ darl+ing: *✧･ﾟ: ?

PERSONAL . . . ✿

MBTI types — logistician ( ISTJ )

description — a logistician is someone with the introverted, observant, thinking, and judging personality traits. logistician’s tend to be reserved yet willful, with a rational outlook on life. they compose their actions carefully and carry them out with methodical purpose.

strengths . . . ✿ —

. open-minded, creative, patient, curious, sarcastic, sweet

weakness . . . ✿ —

. sensitive, indecisive, people-pleasing, anxious, self-critic

family . . . ✿ —

- BEI FEI-YU ( father )

. birthdate : august 27, 1971

. age : 52 years old

. ethnicity : chinese

. occupation : real estate agent

. status : alive

- BEI YIREN ( mother )

. birthdate : february 13, 1974

. age : 50 years old

. ethnicity : chinese

. occupation : teacher

. status : alive

- BEI YUXUAN ( brother )

. birthdate : december 8, 2000

. age : 23 years old

. ethnicity : chinese

. occupation : model

. status : alive

- BEI YICHEN ( sister )

. birthdate : may 1, 2006

. age : 18 years old

. ethnicity : chinese

. occupation : student

. status : alive

- BEI HAOYU ( youngest brother )

. birthdate : october 25, 2008

. age : 15 years old

. ethnicity : chinese

. occupation : student

. status : alive

! ♪ . *. ⋆ moonwalker: *✧･ﾟ: ?

TRIVIA . . . ✿

habits — copies other people’s actions or words, kicks feet when she sits down, blinks a lot when shes lying/nervous

phobias —

. necrophobia - ( fear of death )

. basophobia - ( fear of falling )

medical conditions . . . ✿ —

. anxiety

. insomnia

INTERESTS . . . ✿ —

. likes : video games, ballet, baking, gardening, animals, fashion, & movies.

. dislikes : sickness, hot weather, rude people, crying

. favorite movie : 10 things i hate about you & legally blonde

. favorite artists : snsd, kara, red velvet, twice, ariana grande

FACTS . . . ✿ —

. she was originally going to stay training with pristin and was planned to debut with them but pledis decided to make her debut with seventeen instead

. while training she attended an arts school which she learned ballet at, and the members would always come to her recitals

. she earned the title ‘carats older sister’ due to younger carats always talking about how she always felt like an older sister to them

. in 2020 she gained alot of attention from doing a cover of frozen’s ‘into the unknown’ and was praised for her vocals

. she currently lives with jun and minghao

. she started dating jun in 2020

. she is massively praised for taking part in the entire making of her solo mini album

. she has 3 dogs, bambi and gamie who live with her, and jian who lives with her family in china

. is barley on social media and always says she never wants to be on it much because she hates seeing negative things about her and her members

. she was in orange caramel’s ‘catallena’ mv and in orange caramel’s ‘my copycat’ mv

. used to be way more talkative during debut era but got way quieter and more reserved from all the hate she got from antis

.　 . • ☆ . ° .• °:. *�� ° . ☆ .　 . • ☆ . ° .• °:. *₊ ° . ☆

layout inspired by @svt-rosalie ♡

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

X has clashed with de Moraes over its reluctance to comply with orders to block users. "Brazil blocks Musk’s X after company refuses to name local representative amid feud with judge"

"The justice said the platform will stay suspended until it complies with his orders, and also set a daily fine of 50,000 reais ($8,900) for people or companies using VPNs to access it."

“When we attempted to defend ourselves in court, Judge de Moraes threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts,” the company wrote.

X has clashed with de Moraes over its reluctance to comply with orders to block users.

The looming shutdown is not unprecedented in Brazil.

Lone Brazilian judges shut down Meta’s WhatsApp, the nation’s most widely used messaging app, several times in 2015 and 2016 due to the company’s refusal to comply with police requests for user data. In 2022, de Moraes threatened the messaging app Telegram with a nationwide shutdown, arguing it had repeatedly ignored Brazilian authorities’ requests to block profiles and provide information. He ordered Telegram to appoint a local representative; the company ultimately complied and stayed online.

X and its former incarnation, Twitter, have been banned in several countries — mostly authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan. Other countries, such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest. Twitter was banned in Egypt after the Arab Spring uprisings, which some dubbed the "Twitter revolution," but it has since been restored.

A search Friday on X showed hundreds of Brazilian users inquiring about VPNs that could potentially enable them to continue using the platform by making it appear they were logging on from outside the country. It was not immediately clear how Brazilian authorities would police this practice and impose fines cited by de Moraes.

By GABRIELA SÁ PESSOA, BARBARA ORTUTAY and DAVID BILLERAugust 30, 2024

SAO PAULO — (AP) — Brazil started blocking Elon Musk's social media platform X early Saturday, making it largely inaccessible on both the web and through mobile apps after the billionaire refused to name a legal representative to the country.

The move escalates a monthslong feud between Musk and a Brazilian Supreme Court justice over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation. Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the suspension on Friday.

To block X, Brazil’s telecommunications regulator, Anatel, told internet service providers to suspend users’ access to the social media platform. As of Saturday after midnight local time, major operators had begun doing so.

De Moraes had warned Musk on Wednesday night that X could be blocked in Brazil if he failed to comply with his order to name a representative, and established a 24-hour deadline. The company hasn’t had a representative in the country since earlier this month.

“Elon Musk showed his total disrespect for Brazilian sovereignty and, in particular, for the judiciary, setting himself up as a true supranational entity and immune to the laws of each country,” de Moraes wrote in his decision on Friday.

The justice said the platform will stay suspended until it complies with his orders, and also set a daily fine of 50,000 reais ($8,900) for people or companies using VPNs to access it.

In a later ruling, he backtracked on his initial decision to establish a 5-day deadline for internet service providers themselves — and not just the telecommunications regulator — to block access to X, as well as his directive for app stores to remove virtual private networks, or VPNs.

Brazil is one of the biggest markets for X, which has struggled with the loss of advertisers since Musk purchased the former Twitter in 2022. Market research group Emarketer says some 40 million Brazilians, roughly one-fifth of the population, access X at least once per month.

“This is a sad day for X users around the world, especially those in Brazil, who are being denied access to our platform. I wish it did not have to come to this – it breaks my heart,” X’s CEO Linda Yaccarino said Friday night, adding that Brazil is failing to uphold its constitution’s pledge to forbid censorship.

X had posted on its official Global Government Affairs page late Thursday that it expected X to be shut down by de Moraes, “simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents.”

“When we attempted to defend ourselves in court, Judge de Moraes threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts,” the company wrote.

X has clashed with de Moraes over its reluctance to comply with orders to block users.

Accounts that the platform previously has shut down on Brazilian orders include lawmakers affiliated with former President Jair Bolsonaro’s right-wing party and activists accused of undermining Brazilian democracy. X’s lawyers in April sent a document to the Supreme Court in April, saying that since 2019 it had suspended or blocked 226 users.

In his decision Friday, de Moraes' cited Musk's statements as evidence that X's conduct “clearly intends to continue to encourage posts with extremism, hate speech and anti-democratic discourse, and to try to withdraw them from jurisdictional control.”

In April, de Moraes included Musk as a target in an ongoing investigation over the dissemination of fake news and opened a separate investigation into the executive for alleged obstruction.

Musk, a self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist," has repeatedly claimed the justice’s actions amount to censorship, and his argument has been echoed by Brazil’s political right. He has often insulted de Moraes on his platform, characterizing him as a dictator and tyrant.

De Moraes’ defenders have said his actions aimed at X have been lawful, supported by most of the court’s full bench and have served to protect democracy at a time it is imperiled. He wrote Friday that his ruling is based on Brazilian law requiring internet services companies to have representation in the country so they can be notified when there are relevant court decisions and take requisite action — specifying the takedown of illicit content posted by users, and an anticipated churn of misinformation during October municipal elections.

The looming shutdown is not unprecedented in Brazil.

Lone Brazilian judges shut down Meta’s WhatsApp, the nation’s most widely used messaging app, several times in 2015 and 2016 due to the company’s refusal to comply with police requests for user data. In 2022, de Moraes threatened the messaging app Telegram with a nationwide shutdown, arguing it had repeatedly ignored Brazilian authorities’ requests to block profiles and provide information. He ordered Telegram to appoint a local representative; the company ultimately complied and stayed online.

X and its former incarnation, Twitter, have been banned in several countries — mostly authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan. Other countries, such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest. Twitter was banned in Egypt after the Arab Spring uprisings, which some dubbed the "Twitter revolution," but it has since been restored.

A search Friday on X showed hundreds of Brazilian users inquiring about VPNs that could potentially enable them to continue using the platform by making it appear they were logging on from outside the country. It was not immediately clear how Brazilian authorities would police this practice and impose fines cited by de Moraes.

“This is an unusual measure, but its main objective is to ensure that the court order to suspend the platform's operation is, in fact, effective," Filipe Medon, a specialist in digital law and professor at the law school of Getulio Vargas Foundation, a university in Rio de Janeiro, told The Associated Press.

Mariana de Souza Alves Lima, known by her handle MariMoon, showed her 1.4 million followers on X where she intends to go, posting a screenshot of rival social network BlueSky.

On Thursday evening, Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet service provider, said on X that de Moraes this week froze its finances, preventing it from doing any transactions in the country where it has more than 250,000 customers.

“This order is based on an unfounded determination that Starlink should be responsible for the fines levied—unconstitutionally—against X. It was issued in secret and without affording Starlink any of the due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution of Brazil. We intend to address the matter legally,” Starlink said in its statement. The law firm representing Starlink told the AP that the company appealed, but wouldn’t make further comment.

Musk replied to people sharing the reports of the freeze, adding insults directed at de Moraes. “This guy @Alexandre is an outright criminal of the worst kind, masquerading as a judge,” he wrote.

Musk later posted on X that SpaceX, which runs Starlink, will provide free internet service in Brazil “until the matter is resolved” since “we cannot receive payment, but don’t want to cut anyone off.”

In his decision, de Moraes said he ordered the freezing of Starlink’s assets, as X didn't have enough money in its accounts to cover mounting fines, and reasoning that the two companies are part of the same economic group.

While ordering X’s suspension followed warnings and fines and so was appropriate, taking action against Starlink seems “highly questionable,” said Luca Belli, coordinator of the Getulio Vargas Foundation’s Technology and Society Center.

“Yes, of course, they have the same owner, Elon Musk, but it is discretionary to consider Starlink as part of the same economic group as Twitter (X). They have no connection, they have no integration,” Belli said.

___

Ortutay reported from San Francisco and Biller from Rio. AP writer Mauricio Savarese contributed from Sao Paulo.

Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Soon, we expect Judge Alexandre de Moraes will order X to be shut down in Brazil – simply because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents. These enemies include a duly elected Senator and a 16-year-old girl, among others. When we attempted to defend ourselves in court, Judge de Moraes threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts. Our challenges against his manifestly illegal actions were either dismissed or ignored. Judge de Moraes’ colleagues on the Supreme Court are either unwilling or unable to stand up to him. We are absolutely not insisting that other countries have the same free speech laws as the United States. The fundamental issue at stake here is that Judge de Moraes demands we break Brazil’s own laws. We simply won’t do that. In the days to come, we will publish all of Judge de Moraes’ illegal demands and all related court filings in the interest of transparency. Unlike other social media and technology platforms, we will not comply in secret with illegal orders. To our users in Brazil and around the world, X remains committed to protecting your freedom of speech. ------------------- Em breve, esperamos que o Ministro Alexandre de Moraes ordene o bloqueio do X no Brasil – simplesmente porque não cumprimos suas ordens ilegais para censurar seus opositores políticos. Dentre esses opositores estão um Senador devidamente eleito e uma jovem de 16 anos, entre outros. Quando tentamos nos defender no tribunal, o Ministro ameaçou prender nossa representante legal no Brasil. Mesmo após sua renúncia, ele congelou todas as suas contas bancárias. Nossas contestações contra suas ações manifestamente ilegais foram rejeitadas ou ignoradas. Os colegas do Ministro Alexandre de Moraes no Supremo Tribunal Federal estão ou impossibilitados de ou não querem enfrentá-lo. Não estamos absolutamente insistindo que outros países tenham as mesmas leis de liberdade de expressão dos Estados Unidos. A questão fundamental em jogo aqui é que o Ministro Alexandre de Moraes exige que violemos as próprias leis do Brasil. Simplesmente não faremos isso. Nos próximos dias, publicaremos todas as exigências ilegais do Ministro e todos os documentos judiciais relacionados, para fins de transparência. Ao contrário de outras plataformas de mídia social e tecnologia, não cumpriremos ordens ilegais em segredo. Aos nossos usuários no Brasil e ao redor do mundo, o X continua comprometido em proteger sua liberdade de expressão.

[bambamramfan]

This is obviously a critical response. Also Scott has posted his follow-up post "Highlights from the Comments" here, which I'm also responding to.

Now, even if you aren't conservative I think there is real value in saying "a major cultural change, focused on some sectors, recently happened. WHY did it happen. What were the turning points and structural factors." And I don't think "because we suddenly became better people" is a good answer to that. So exploring the cause and effect from civil rights law to the social justice shift is not, a priori, a bad idea.

Hanania's very partisan and activist slant on the question I disagree with, but it doesn't mean he makes no good empirical points. If you only read the people you agree with, well, they tend not to circulate inconvenient facts to your side and then you get blind-sided. And despite his reputation, I really do like RH's writing on China. And I'm on the record that running large parts of employment regulation through a very tiny errata of the Civil Rights Act, leads to absurd and bad outcomes and bad law.

But I'm pretty disappointed at his book (as summed up here) and Scott's moderate reaction to it. I'm glad Scott pointed out "these administrative changes in the 1970's are unlikely to be responsible for a cultural shift that hit max velocity in 2014." Because Scott gives a lot of credit to the dystopia it paints of government and corporate hiring programs forced to circumnavigate huge vagaries by implementing contradictory and Orwellian hiring standards. The second comments post does this even more so. And I feel that even when these anecdotes are factually correct, they are leaving out extremely important context. To wit:

Bureaucratic hiring processes are already this Orwellian process of doublespeak that pay attention to a lot of factors besides who would be the best at the job. All the procedures people describe were already in place, just for other types of qualifications. Random example: Harvard prides itself on always have a student from every state in it's undergraduate body. Some of our states represent about 0.2% of the population. To guarantee that say Wyoming or Idaho always have someone on campus, you basically have to target geographically - and not by merit. Or a hedge fund that wants to impress investors by hiring graduates from the right schools, even if they've found ambitious state school students are better bang for the buck. It was never the case that employers cared purely for merit and then race came into play, even if it is the case that race is now one of several factors they have to juggle for.

Here's the bigger issue. The book and review really emphasizes how terrible it is to be caught in the bind that the US government wants organizations to be racially equitable, but it doesn't just give a list of rules to follow. It says "you figure it out. So long as you don't cause a problem that's fine. But if someone thinks you're racist, they can sue, and we'll have to prove it out in court." This creates an environment where the rules are unclear, and the best you can do is follow the best practices that similar organizations do, and say you were trying your best. And so if some organizations for idiosyncratic reasons take diversity more seriously, everyone else is forced to follow suit. For certain types of people this causes scrupulosity spirals. I agree that sucks. But this is by design! Not just in civil rights, but in the entire US administrative state, it was decided long ago. See, you can have a legal environment where regulations are enforced either through: a) An agency draws up all the rules for companies to follow, and has the workforce to go inspect every company to make sure they are complying. This is what we do with cars or restaurants, and most of Europe does with a lot more areas than we do. b) The government says "don't fuck this up. You're on your own" and you are left alone until someone thinks you've fucked it up enough that they sue you. Trials are a TERRIBLE way to work this out, but it's supposed to motivate you to be extra careful. This is much more random but much less costly tax wise, so it is the system the US has decided to go with for many of its laws.

So I agree "government by lawsuit" is a terrible curse upon America (and why we have so many more lawyers per capitate than other Western nations.) It leads to all the moral problems this book and review highlights. But it's not limited to the realm of race relations and it's by design so that we don't have to pay more bureaucrats. I doubt Hanania would want us to move to the European model which has less scrupulosity issues.

[rainbowsky]

GG and the Duomo di Milano

Duomo 2019 (left), 2023 (right) and 2024 (top).

He has posted a photo of it whenever he goes to Milan, since his first trip there in 2019. Here's my CPN on that.

Fake, fan fiction, CPN.

Of course, as an artist and a photographer it makes sense that GG is interested in this beautiful building. Gorgeous intricate architecture that is covered in lifelike statues, no doubt it is very satisfying to photograph. It's truly one of the most stunning cathedrals in the world. But we're turtles, so we're always going to look at things from a slightly different angle.

This CPN first came up back in 2019, the first time he went to Milan. GG said in an interview that he was excited to see the cathedral, and he posted a picture of it on his Weibo account. Turtles at the time speculated that GG was inspired by the photos that were all over the news in 2016, when same sex marriage was legalized there.

It was the location of massive LGBTQ rallies when same sex marriage was being debated and put to a vote, and was the site of equally massive celebrations when that vote won.

Some people are skeptical of this connection because they feel that the time gap of a couple years is too large for it to be relevant, but to me those people can't possibly understand how significant the same sex marriage fight is to queer people who wish to marry (and who wish to have their human rights recognized in general).

Especially around that time in history, when the fight was at its most active globally. There was a period of a few years where the issue was constantly in the news, as more and more countries were gradually recognizing legal rights for same sex couples. Images of those protests and celebrations were inspiring and exciting for queer people all over the world, and those who cared a lot about the issue followed that news pretty closely.

This is an issue of significance to queer people everywhere, even those who don't want to marry. It represents a shift toward acceptance and toward broader legal recognition of equal human rights for queer people.

Same sex marriage is a huge hurdle toward equality for anyone whose rights are at stake, because most of the opposition to human rights for queer people tends to come from religious groups and conservatives with narrow notions of 'family values'. When societies acknowledge - even on paper - that queer families are legitimate, the biggest barrier has been crossed.

Based on a lot of things I've seen from GG over the years I believe he's very deeply invested in Pride and gay rights. He's not at liberty to be as open about it as he'd like to be, but I believe he shows what he can. I have talked about that in more detail in this post.

I also believe that marriage is something that both GG and DD care a lot about. They are each others anchors in life, and even when they don't get to spend a lot of time together, they are home to each other. DD has also talked about wanting a son, and GG has also shown interest in children and family and often talks about a simple life.

They just ooze domesticity on many levels, and I think that even if it doesn't fit within their lives right now, they probably talk about and think about building a family together one day. And given the culture in China their parents likely want that for them as well.

I talked about the possibility they might already be married in this post. I talked about the possibility of them wanting kids in this post about DD saying he wanted a son, and later in this one from an OOL interview where GG mentioned envying Gu Wei's life.

Both GG and DD strike me as being connected to queer culture, just given some of their jokes, attitudes, etc. and some of the people they're associated with. Even their experience with filming CQL (which I talked about in this post). They're also both from the younger generation in China, which is much more progressive and informed on these issues.

All of this leads me to believe that it's not an accident that this landmark has captured GG's imagination.

The Duomo is also a very popular wedding/romantic photo destination, and where couples often propose.

I think that it's romantic that GG posted the moon over the cathedral this time. There are a lot of fake rumors and CPN around GG and DD and the moon, and turtles believe that they often send pictures of the moon to each other. They've both posted photos of the moon on social media in the past.

There have been a lot of posts about their connection with the moon over the years. A few of my favorites are Pie's post from Mid-Autumn Festival, Pie's post about Midsummer Moon (among other things) and of course the LRLG rumor that talks about DD taking pictures of the moon for GG.

Given what this landmark might mean to GG, it makes this photo even more special.

Or he could just enjoy photographing a pretty building. We'll likely never know for sure.

[lesbianchemicalplant]

Home Office 213/926 or HO 213/926 is a Home Office file which records the secret deportation from the United Kingdom of thousands of seafarers to China in 1945 and 1946, permanently separating them from their families. It was officially entitled "Compulsory repatriation of undesirable Chinese seamen."[1]

[...] As soon as World War II ended, Blue Funnel Line reduced the wages of Chinese seamen to a level that it internally admitted was too low to live on. Chinese seamen were also barred from seeking employment ashore.[8] On 19 October 1945, two months after the end of the war, Courtenay Denis Carew Robinson, Assistant Under-Secretary of State for the Home Office, chaired a secret meeting at Whitehall, joined by representatives of the Foreign Office, the Ministry of War Transport, and the Liverpool City Police and immigration inspectorate. In the meeting, the Home Office finalised a policy titled "Compulsory repatriation of undesirable Chinese seamen," under a file designated HO 213/926.[9] The policy was kept secret in part because it was illegal, as only sailors who had been discharged due to criminal convictions could legally be deported, and only a tiny number of the seamen targeted for deportation had faced any charges during their time in the service. The Home Office had also internally acknowledged that even among the small number that had faced charges, minor gambling and opium offences were commonplace in dockside life and did not warrant deportation.[9] After the policy was finalised, Home Office officials, along with Liverpool Police, worked with shipping companies in the UK to arrest Chinese seamen and forcibly deported them to China. Some of the workers were forced to sign discharge papers that would have them discharged in China, with no way to return to the UK.[10] To deport the seamen, Blue Funnel modified some of its ships, including the steamships Diomed, Menelaus, Priam, Sarpedon and Theseus, installing makeshift bunks to hold the seamen who had been brought directly by the police. By the end of 1945, the police increased their efforts to round up remaining Chinese seamen, searching through homes in night raids and asking police chiefs elsewhere in the country to report any seamen. One immigration office memo stated that "It should not be difficult, if energetic steps are taken, to weed these out of the restaurant kitchens, laundries, etc." Deportations continued until at least December 1946.[9] In the War, many of the seamen based in Liverpool had settled in the city, falling in love and starting families with local women. Those families were neither notified of the deportations nor given any information as to the fates of the seamen, leaving many to assume that the seamen had simply abandoned them.[11] By mid-1946, rumours of the deportations had spread through the Liverpool community. The Liverpool Echo published a report under the headline "British Wives of Chinese." A group of the seamen's wives protested against the government that summer, stating that they were left destitute and that "we are left to live on public aid, charity and the help of our families."[12] However, the government refused to acknowledge the protest.[8] Labour MP Bessie Braddock wrote to the Home Office in support of the protesting wives, but was told that the deportations would continue since, if they didn't, "it might embarrass the immigration officer, Liverpool, the police and the shipping companies concerned."[9]

the british government denied this up until 2022