#in favour of equity

[beardedmrbean]

A UCLA professor was suspended for not providing special treatment to black students in the light of George Floyd's death. The professor is suing the University of California Los Angeles for more than $19 million over the well-publicized incident that garnered national notoriety.

Gordon Klein – a lecturer of accounting at the Anderson School of Management – made headlines in June 2020 when he refused to give preferential treatment to black students.

As Blaze News previously reported, Klein was asked by a student if black students would be given special accommodations because of George Floyd's death and the subsequent Black Lives Matter protests.

"The student requested a no-harm and shortened final exam, and extended deadlines for final assignments and projects in consideration of black students' well-being in light of nationwide protests against police brutality," the Daily Bruin reported.

Klein responded by writing:

Thanks for your suggestion in your email below that I give black students special treatment, given the tragedy in Minnesota. Do you know the names of the classmates that are black? How can I identify them since we've been having online classes only? Are there any students that may be of mixed parentage, such as half black-half Asian? What do you suggest I do with respect to them? A full concession or just half?

Klein asked the student if "a white student" from Minneapolis "might be possibly even more devastated" by the death of George Floyd.

Klein then quoted Martin Luther King Jr., and asked, "Remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the 'color of their skin.' Do you think that your request would run afoul of MLK's admonition?"

A student took a screenshot of the email conversation, and it quickly circulated online.

UCLA students claimed Klein's email was "backhandedly racist" and that it undermined the Black Lives Matter movement.

The same day as Klein wrote the email, a Change.org petition was launched, and it demanded Klein be "terminated for his extremely insensitive, dismissive, and woefully racist response to his students’ request for empathy and compassion during a time of civil unrest."

The petition — with more than 21,000 signatures — read, "His behavior is not reflective of the equity, respect, and justice that UCLA stands for as an institution."

Two days later, Anderson School Dean Antonio Bernardo announced that Klein was suspended and an investigation was initiated into the "troubling conduct."

"Providing a safe, respectful and equitable environment in which students can effectively learn is fundamental to UCLA’s mission," Bernardo declared. "We share common principles across the university of integrity, excellence, accountability, respect, and service. Conduct that demonstrates a disregard for our core principles, including an abuse of power, is not acceptable."

"I deeply regret the increased pain and anger that our community has experienced at this very difficult time," Bernardo added. "We must and will hold each other to higher standards."

Klein was reinstated less than a month after the incident.

However, Klein alleges that the public backlash had caused irreparable damage.

Klein derives significant income from his expert witness practice.

The College Fix reported, "He has testified, for example, in several high-profile court cases, including Michael Jackson’s wrongful death, Apple’s acquisition of Dr. Dre’s Beats headphones, and the valuation of General Motors’ assets in bankruptcy."

Klein’s attorney – Steve Goldberg – told the College Fix this week, "He was one of the top damages experts in the country who was historically bringing in well over $1 million dollars a year and trending upwards when it happened."

"That practice went to ashes right after he was suspended," said Goldberg, a member of the Markun, Zusman & Compton law firm.

Klein, who continues to teach as a full-time lecturer at UCLA, is suing the university for "well over $19 million in damages."

Klein's lawsuit is scheduled to go to trial on March 4 at the Santa Monica Courthouse.

Klein, who joined the UCLA Anderson School of Management in 1981, first filed a lawsuit against the school in September 2021.

UCLA did not respond to repeated requests for comment by The College Fix.

[mariocki]

On the 24th of July 1979 the cast of Bent, including stars Ian McKellen and Tom Bell, joined members of other West End productions in protesting increased VAT on theatre tickets. In August, McKellen wrote a piece for Plays and Players magazine:

"The march through London's West End on 24 July was a high-spirited and invigorating experience. At least 4,000 members of British Actors' Equity were on parade, representing every theatre in the country. I was under the Criterion Theatre's banner with the cast of Bent, who were reinforced by the box-office and stage staff and by our manager, Ian Albery. At a brief rally at the Opera House in Covent Garden, its director John Tooley welcomed us all; Trevor Nunn was there with the Royal Shakespeare Company and Peter Hall cabled his support from the National Theatre. Such unity of workers and employers, of commercial and subsidised theatres, was an example to other troubled industries. But then, we had an urgent case to present to the House of Commons, where the day ended as we lobbied our Members of Parliament."

[libraryofantiquitea]

𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐨𝐧 𝐦𝐲 𝐤𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐬.

pairing: jake "hangman" seresin x reader

summary: you have a meeting to attend via zoom when jake is leaving for work. he has interesting ways of saying goodbye.

warnings: explicit, minors do not interact! oral (female receiving), brief masturbation (male), semi-public sex.

word count: 3.4k

author's notes: no beta, we die like goose. thank you to the creator coven for giving me this plot bunny to turn into the beast that it became!

likes / comments / reblogs are very much appreciated! thank you for reading! ♥

“Jake, honey! I have a video meeting in a couple of minutes!”

You liked to give your husband a heads up before you went into any meeting longer than half an hour whenever he was home. It had started in early 2020 when you were adjusting to working from home - everyone was - and Jake had kicked down the door of the spare bedroom slash office you were in, bare ass naked to retrieve some laundry. Thankfully your camera had been off, but it had the potential to not only get you fired, but cause an international incident.

“How long?” Jake asked, wandering from the kitchen and into the hallway, scarfing down half a sandwich.

You looked at your watch as you began to turn and head back to your office. “Um, an hour and a half?”

“I’ll be gone to work by then, I’m working the night shift at the base,” he said petulantly, shoulders slumping slightly. “I won’t see you until tomorrow morning.”

“I know, honey,” you said with a pout, turning back around and closing the distance between you. “I’m sorry. I tried to get it rescheduled, but the Dean was the one calling the shots on this one.”

Jake rolled his eyes, stuffing more of the sandwich in his mouth. “Well, I’ll pop in before I leave to say goodbye.”

“If you don’t I’ll be cross,” you said, wrapping your arms around Jake’s shoulders. You stood on your tiptoes to give him a kiss, not caring that he’d gotten mustard on you somehow.

—

“Mrs. Seresin, did you have any updates from your meetings?”

You’d been trying to pay attention, but your mind kept drifting. Any meeting over an hour seemed cruel, and in the afternoon you were less likely to be at your best. You were also well aware that Jake would be leaving any moment, listening to the sounds of him gathering up gear and packing his bag for the night.

The Dean of the department and you were on a first name basis, but everyone had been calling you Mrs. Seresin since the wedding, because you couldn’t stop giggling and blushing over it, this time it was no exception.

“I do,” you replied, reaching for your notebook and opening a document containing some agendas and meeting notes that lived on your computer. You filled the void by saying “um” a few times while you searched through your materials. “The Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility Committee met earlier this week to provide some feedback on the proposal of launching the Employment Equity Plan. Everyone was in favour but they did have some questions about how comprehensive the plan was.”

There was a light rapping on the door, and you turned to look back at it before turning back the camera. “Just a moment. Jake’s off to work.”

“Take your time!” one of your colleagues said, as you turned off your camera and microphone.

“Come in!” you said to Jake, standing up at the same time to greet him at the door. 

Jake stepped in wearing his service khakis, and smiled at you. “Off to work I go, darlin’,” he said in a sing-song voice, wrapping his arms around you.

You hugged him tightly, turning your head to give him a kiss on the cheek. “You’ll call before I go to bed?” you asked.

“Of course!” Jake replied, ducking his head down and kissing you sweetly. He pulled back, saying nothing, looking toward your desk. “That leg is gonna give out at any moment,” he declared.

“Oh, it’s nothing,” you said, waving your hand. “I’ll fix it up later.”

“It’ll take me two seconds,” Jake said, relinquishing his hold on you and moving toward your desk before crawling under it. The space beneath your desk was certainly big enough to fit him, but you weren’t going to deny that he looked a little goofy crowded under there.

You smiled to yourself before getting situated back in your chair, turning on the camera and microphone on your laptop back on. Your colleagues were talking amongst themselves about the equity plan you had spoke of.

“Sorry about that,” you said, trying to get comfortable in your chair despite Jake futzing about with the leg of your desk. “Won’t see him until morning.”

“Oh, don’t worry about it,” the Dean said, dismissively waving his hand. “Shall we get back into it?”

“Of course,” you replied, looking down to check your notes, catching a glimpse of Jake using a small screwdriver to tighten up one of the screws. Seriously, did he just carry that around in his pocket? “I wondered if we could bring forth a couple of goals to help us promote a representative workforce? I think that would grab peoples’ attention right off the bat.”

“That’s actually a really good idea,” one of your colleagues said, just as Jake appeared to be finishing up.

You idly wondered how he planned to get out from under there, but figured you could just turn your camera off for a moment when he gave you the okay.

He did no such thing.

Clearing your throat, you looked through your notes once more and tried not to pay Jake any mind, who had situated himself between your legs. You had no idea what he was playing at, but did your best to ignore him.

“The first goal we drafted up was ‘to increase the recruitment of employees from equity-deserving groups,’” you continued, feeling one of Jake’s hands on your knee. “And the second was ‘To enhance the experience of current employees from equity-deserving groups.’”

“That committee of yours does some good work,” one of your colleagues chuckled. “Those are great!”

“Thank you,” you said, reminding yourself to breathe as if everything were normal as Jake’s other hand settled on your other knee. “I’ll be sure to pass that along to them.”

You turned your microphone off, and while still looking at the camera muttered, “Jacob Seresin, what on earth are you doing down there?”

“Don’t worry about it,” he murmured, the palms of his strong and calloused hands moving up your thighs. You pursed your lips tightly, trying to bring your legs close together on instinct, but Jake just pushed them further apart. “Keep your legs open, sweetheart.”

The conversation had moved on, and your colleagues were talking amongst themselves about the plan. Where you were the most junior staff person in the meeting, it was unlikely you would be contributing much to the bigger conversation, and for that you were thankful, because you certainly did not want to send your husband on his merry way.

“Jake,” you murmured, briefly closing your eyes and letting out a contented sigh. Though you knew it was gauche, you kept your eyes focused on the small image of yourself on your laptop screen. You knew how responsive you were, what sorts of things Jake did to you. The last thing that you wanted was for it to be extremely noticeable to your colleagues that there was something happening.

So, even though you wanted to be looking down under your desk, between your legs, you looked at yourself.

“God, I can smell you, darlin’,” Jake purred, pressing his face to the inside of one of your thighs. He inhaled sharply, and you made a small sound behind your mouth. “How wet are you?”

What a dick. He knew you couldn’t respond. You shifted a little in your chair, nodding along to the discussion in the meeting, even though you had no fuckin’ clue what they were discussing.

Suddenly, Jake’s face was pressed against your core. Your lips parted in a small gasp, but on screen it just looked like an ordinary sigh. “Soaked,” Jake murmured, and you could feel the vibrations of his voice against you through the layers of fabric that separated the two of you. “Oh my god, baby girl. I could taste you just like this.”

“Any thoughts?”

Fuck.

You turned your microphone back on. “Um,” you stuttered, shifting your hips slightly when you felt Jake’s fingers hook into the waistband of your leggings. “I thought we agreed on seven priorities instead of six. I believe it was Don who alluded to ‘lucky number seven.’”

“You know what? You’re right! Do you remember what the seventh priority was?”

“Recognition.”

When there were no follow up questions, you turned your microphone back off.

Jake’s fingertips brushed along your skin as he pulled your leggings down your legs. You raised your eyebrows at the screen, pretending to be engaged, meanwhile you were suddenly pantsless in front of the team you reported to.

“Oh my god, baby girl,” Jake murmured reverently, and you swallowed hard as Jake’s fingers traced over the edges of your labia through your underwear. As he had observed before, you were already wet, and the sensation of him touching you had you briefly closing your eyes. The drag of the wet fabric against your clit, Jake’s thick fingers pressing against you, had you rolling your hips toward his touch.

The Dean said your name. “Does the Office of Equity and Inclusion being the lead to ensure clarity, confidentiality and transparency make sense to you?”

You begrudgingly turned your microphone back on. “Oh … yes. That, um, seems like an appropriate office to take the lead on that.”

God, you wished the Dean and the rest of your colleagues would just stop asking you for input. Compared to everyone else in the meeting you made significantly less money and had significantly less say in the operations of the university. Then again, they were likely trying to make a point about the whole equity plan by including you.

“You sound so wrecked,” Jake murmured, rubbing your clit through your wet underwear. You whined and lifted your hips toward your touch. “They probably can’t tell, but I can.”

Panicked, you checked to make sure you’d turned your microphone off - you hadn’t. You hoped to any deity that would listen that no one had heard that as you turned your mic back off.

“Jake,” you whispered, trying not to move your lips, “please.”

“Please what?” he asked, pressing a kiss to the inside of your thigh, as his fingers pressed your entrance, digits wrapped in your wet underwear plunging gently into you. “Stop? Keep going?”

“You asshole,” you murmured good naturedly. “Keep - keep going.”

“Mrs. Seresin, you had something to contribute?”

Fuck.

You began to speak, only to have three different people let you know that your mic was turned off. “I, uh, just wanted to double check by what percentage we wanted to reduce our overall workforce analysis gap by?”

“Eighty percent.”

“Thank you!”

While you had been speaking, Jake had pulled your underwear off, grabbing your legs and pulling them over his shoulders. On camera, it looked like you had shifted and sat back a little in your chair. It wasn’t … inaccurate. This time you triple checked that your microphone was off.

“God, look at that sweet little pussy, darlin’,” Jake groaned. You could feel his warm breath against your clit, and swallowed hard. “I can’t wait to put my mouth on it, to taste you.”

You bit at your lip, and keeping your eyes on yourself, attempted to deduce what it would look like if you fisted Jake’s hair in your hand. Unfortunately, it would definitely look like your hand moved between your legs, so you opted to keep your hands above your desk, much to your dismay. You wanted to feel Jake’s soft blond hair through your fingers, pull on it gently, command him closer to your cunt.

Despite Jake’s declarations of wanting to put his mouth on you, you felt his fingers once more. You gasped, hoping it looked like a yawn on camera, rolling your hips into Jake’s touch.

“Jake,” you whined - carefully - hoping that you wouldn’t be asked to speak, or what your thoughts were, again. “Please. Put your mouth on me.”

“Darlin’, you sound so pretty when you’re begging,” Jake hummed, pressing his mouth where your thigh met your loins. “Maybe I want to hear it some more?”

He was not being fair and it drove you mad, but you wouldn’t want him to change.

On your laptop screen, the Dean and your colleagues were in a deep discussion about the second pillar of the plan, inclusive excellence actions,. And while you had been looking forward to this discussion, it paled in comparison to giving your full, undivided attention to your husband, on his knees between your legs, mouth so close to your pussy, strong and calloused palms alternating between moving over your thighs and calves.

“You’re - you’re going to be late,” you attempted to rationalize. God, you wanted him to draw this out, but you also didn’t want him to get in trouble.

“Beg.”

A shiver ran down along your spine; you knew that was his lieutenant voice. You might have come right then and there if you hadn’t been looking forward to his mouth on you so much.

You made sure to watch yourself on screen, you couldn’t let others know how absolutely wrecked you were.

“Honey, please,” you purred, in a voice that you knew slid over Jake like silk. “I need your mouth on me baby. Fuck, you make me feel so good. Put your tongue in my pussy. Please. I need to feel you, and I know you want to taste it.”

“Mrs. Seresin?”

You really wished you could just leave the meeting and that the Dean would stop jokingly calling you that. You could feel Jake’s wide smile, full of teeth, against your skin, everytime he was reminded that you were his.

“Your microphone is off.”

Your hand was trembling as you reached for your mouse, moving the cursor to turn the mic back on. “Sorry,” you apologized, and holy fuck did your voice ever sound strangled. “Talking to myself mostly.”

The Dean laughed. “Quite all right!”

You turned your microphone off, and that was when Jake’s tongue began to move along your lips. Inhaling sharply, you balled your fingers into a fist, dragging them against your desk.

“Jake,” you whined, letting your eyelids slip closed.

“I think you’ve earned this,” he murmured, the audible sound of his swallowing down your juices far too much to bear. Your hips undulated toward him, and he chuckled softly. “Such a good girl.”

He was sucking your clit gently into his mouth, hauling you closer to his face. You gasped, reaching down and gripping the bottom of your desk chair. It was difficult when your focus was drifting between Jake’s mouth on you, and watching yourself on screen to ensure that it didn’t look like what was happening, was in fact, happening.

You bit down on your lip repeatedly, as Jake’s tongue rolled over your clit before descending lower. Slowly, wetly, he licked his way into you. Moaning against your tightly pursed lips, you arched off your chair, wanting more of him inside of you. The tip of his tongue licked against your walls, and he groaned like it was the sweetest thing he had ever tasted.

If you asked him, he would say that it was.

You could feel him shift, and without even looking you could tell that he was rubbing himself through his trousers. There wouldn’t be enough time for him to get changed, and you were certain his other tans were in a laundry basket somewhere.

Jake pulled his tongue from you, and you mourned the loss pathetically, whining and trying to chase his mouth. He placated you by slowly pressing one finger inside of you, as his tongue laved over your clit.

“You want it so bad, don’t you?” he hummed against you. You risked a look down, and holy fuck, you’d never seen a sight so gorgeous. Jake’s mouth on your pussy, his bright green eyes looking up at you. “My mouth, my fingers, my cock. So hungry for it all.”

Tightly closing your eyes, you reached for your phone, and thumbed at it to make it look like you were checking your messages, when really you were snapping a quick photo of Jake - eyes bright, tongue licking along your folds, open palm rubbing at his crotch.

“They’re gonna want to talk to me soon,” you murmured, setting your phone down, fingers flexing against your desk. “Please … make me come. Let me come.”

“God, darlin’.”

Jake wrapped his arms around your thighs, hauled you closer, mouth on a mission. You gasped as he sucked your clit gently into his mouth, and then pressed two of his long, thick fingers inside of you. You chanced a glance down at him again, and god, even he looked like he was beginning to come apart at the seams.

Your eyes quickly lifted back to your screen. You didn’t look too fucked out, but you didn’t look like you probably should have in a meeting. You hoped that it was subtle enough that no one else could notice.

As if on cue, your supervisor asked for your input.

“Um,” you choked out, fingers reaching for the edge of the desk. Oh god, Jake’s tongue was flat against your clit, and his fingers were pumping in and out of you just like he fucked. His fingers weren’t as thick as his cock, but they were still his, and he still knew how to stretch you open slowly, perfectly. “Can you, uh, remind me where - jeez - where we are?”

“The third priority, recruitment.”

Briefly, you hung your head, trying to compose yourself. You could feel the pressure beginning to build at the base of your spine. Jake’s tongue moved inside of you, along his fingers. Oh my god, you were going to come. He was going to make you come on camera. You could see the mischievous twinkle in Jake’s eyes even if you couldn’t see it.

“Right, recruitment,” you repeated, unable to keep yourself from rolling your hips. You wanted to fuck Jake’s face so badly as he brought you to the edge, but there was no way. As if sensing your dilemma, Jake’s free hand gripped your hip and pinned you to the chair. 

You chose to ignore the concerned look on one of your colleague’s faces. “You had some really great wording for the fifth action in a call that we had, but I’m afraid I didn’t capture it. Would you mind repeating it?”

Yes, I fucking mind!

Jake was relentless. You couldn’t move, all eyes were on you. Trembling, you reached for your notebook to flip to the page with relevant notes. Nails scraped against the edge of the desk, as Jake whispered below, “C’mon, darlin’. Be a good girl. Come - come on me. I want to taste you. Baby, let me taste you.”

He was begging you now.

“Tha - thank you,” you stuttered, knuckles turning white as you continued to grip the edge of your desk. “What I had suggested was ‘Develop and - ha - facilitate a specialized candidate caaaaare program aimed at - ohgod - empowering and supporting equity-deserving job seekers naaaaavigating the employment process.”

“Are you okay?”

“Fine!” you replied quickly, as Jake crooked his fingers inside of you. “I think I have to sneeze. Be right back!”

You turned both your microphone and your camera off, ignoring the concerned looks from your coworkers.

“Jake!” you cried, head thrown back as you moved your hips, fucking yourself on his fingers, chasing his tongue. “Honey please. Please!”

You tangled your hands in his hair, pulling hard, and he lifted his gaze to yours. You came with a shout, pressing down against Jake’s fingers and face so hard that his knuckles brushed your entrance, that you were positive he wouldn’t be able to get the scent of you out of his nostrils all day. Jake groaned against you, lapping up every bit of your slick. When he eventually pulled away, he licked his fingers before slowly standing up. You grabbed at his wrist, pulling his hand toward your face. He slipped his fingers into your mouth, and fucked your face slowly.

“Baby,” you hummed, leaning into his touch against your face. His thumb brushed along your bottom lip, and you looked up at him. “Baby, what about you?”

“I get home at six am tomorrow,” he purred.

Your eyes lit up, knowing what kind of mood he would be in after enduring the desperation of needing release all night. “I’ll be waiting.”

/end. 

[daemon-in-my-head]

There's like, as many interpretations as there are simps. But. Buuuut. I'd like to present the shit constantly rotting in my brain since I already talked about my gremlin yday and to kinda elbaorate on prev post bout it (so u get a sense of what's going on and how bad the rot rly is).

Personally, I enjoy my Gortash twisted. He does hold affection for Durge. Truly. But in a really, really, really fucked up way. Buddy wants to present the world to them, but with that he means thru the view of cage bars. He would and will unleash psychological warfare on Durge and cut their achilles tendon or chain them up as long as it means they can't run and they're his. Only his. Only his to look at, only his to touch, only his to own. Fuck Bhaal, Gortash is their god and creator. Yes they may be equals in mind but there are no two true rulers, only one. And even if you are equals it does not mean equity or justice. Nor does it mean any of them will play fair.

Do they spare someone without a proper reason? Oh well, the person will still go missing. Do they grow 'soft' or disagree with a particularly violent approach? No worries, he'll remind them of what they are. What they're good at, how they should behave. He's humanising a monster for the sole reason of binding them to him, eradicating any other bonds they may have had with others and perfectly isolating them. Never shying away from telling the monster how miserably it would be without him. Any sort of present has a double meaning, even if it's solely because he wants to see it in their hands. He claims the iron throne and never reshapes or renames it, declaring his intentions to Bhaal, that he'll take everything, including Durge, from him.

As for Durge, they're similar in their desire to obsess and possess, but they go about differently. They're self-sacrificial as fuck. If he'd ask them to, they'd clip their own wings. They need to protect him from all the pain and suffering so they bring about more than anyone else ever could. They'd sell their soul if they could claim and protect him. Adorn him in whatever they please and ensure not a single hair is out of place on their favorite treasure. They would enact a massacre for the simple mistake of looking at them or Gorty in a displeasing way but they too would lock and chain up Gortash if it would help them in achieving their goal.

They see them as the person he is, but treat him like the puppet they desire. While equals in mind, they know that he's but a mere mortal man and how insignificant he'd be unless they allow him to shine. And if he doesn't shine the way they like him to, they're sure to remind him of who they are. Gortash may decide the tune but they're the one who'll lead the dance, and he can either follow willingly or they'll just push and pull on his strings until he does.

They both look at each other as a person but don't treat themselves in such a way if there's just the slightest reason not to. They'd ruin the other for their own selfishly selfless wishes and both of them long to be the one to kill the other because in those twisted lil minds, it's the greatest honour and the highest form of possession. 'Love me or hate me, both are in my favour' kinda way of approaching things. Claiming the life of another solely for themselves, righting another life to forget the wrongs of their own. Honestly, they'd probably go as far as coming up and enacting a plan to seal both their souls in the same prison if they could, fucking over both Bane and Bhaal. Sure themselves too along the way but neither of them considers their own demise something horrible if it can only help them advance their deepest desires. They're insane. They're violent and downright abusive in their way of dealing with things, but their goals started off at something positive. Something nice. They want to present the world to one another, want to see the other one finally achieve the happiness they think they deserve, but they can and will not let anyone else, not even the person themselves, get in the way of providing this present.

Now don't get me wrong though, they are capable of softness. Geniun affection even. It's just that they're both so screwed up they expect an ulterior motive whenever they're faced with it, and as such they always attach one themselves too. Softness for the sake of being soft would be a weakness, so they have gain something from it at all times. And whoever gives in first will face the consequences of being so weak.

As I said, I like em toxic and hurting and I meant that LMFAO. Give me those absolutely insane yanderes that only exist in the deepest darkest corner of the bookshelf. Also yes, this is very much Ellie nd the Bastard. May I remind you of somebody stabbing himself or humiliating the other just to prove a fucking point. Or that one oneshot I wrote with them in mind where the other one goes absolutely bonkers after loss and accepts a deal with Bane? Yeah, it's always been there. Nobody here has been safe or sane lol.

Also the reason why Gortash used the nickname he did is cuz well, he himself already has that light motif (albeit dark sun isn't particularly a great lightsource) so 'Elli' is just another way to put his stamp on him in a roundabout almost cute looking manner. And then u dig deeper and you notice how very much not cute anything they do is. They're so fucked up. I love them.

[nicolettemarionette]

Business with Pleasure

Pairing: Kendall Roy x Reader x Stewy Hosseini Description: Stewy is preoccupied when Kendall comes to him with a pitch. You don't seem to mind the intrusion, though. Words: 1K Rating: SMUT (more under the cut)

Warnings: Cursing, drinking, implied drug use, smut, age gap, semi-public fondling, exhibition, teasing

A/N: A horny reimagining of S1E3 because I'm a slut for Kendall and Stewy ;)

Part 2 up now!

✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦

It's a party; Kendall Roy had attended more parties than he could remember. From lavish galas filled with pissing contests of charitable donations, to tedious mixers spent appeasing disingenuous executives from billion dollar corporations, to ragers mixing copious amounts of recreational drugs and hard liquor. The gathering he finds himself at now resembles the latter - pharmaceutical helpers being handed around like party favours as soon as he steps onto the threshold.

He swallows down the itch to indulge, manoeuvring his way through the coked up crowd. A thick curtain separates him from a private room and the familiar laugh of an old friend. He's prepared, thoroughly confident in his approach as he pushes into the red-lit space.

Then he's unprepared for the sight of you; eyes half lidded, makeup smudged, lips swollen, hand gripping the older man's wrist, fingers hidden under a silky dress, hips rocking of their own accord. Kendall tears his eyes away, clearing his throat, "Stewy."

"Kendall," Stewy doesn't move his arm, despite your cheeks flushing at the intrusion. He merely raises his brows, "Kinda in the middle of something here."

"Yeah, well...we need to talk." It's curt and a clear indication for privacy, which Stewy wilfully ignores, his breath ghosting over your neck as he bends down to breathe in the familiar smell: a luxury fragrance he'd gifted you. Sweet, floral, delicate, just like you.

"Then talk."

Kendall frowns, then sighs exasperatedly, arms crossing over his chest as he looks everywhere but the lavish love seat you're sprawled across. "Okay, so you know how everyone kinda...hates you."

Stewy hums, "Uh huh. No, that's not something I'm aware of. Do you hate me, sweetheart?"

His fingers touch you again, lazily sliding over your pussy, grazing your clit, drawing a soft whimper from your lips. You shake your head pathetically in response to his question, though you're sure it's rhetorical. In reward he applies more pressure, a shit eating grin plastered to his face, corners of his eyes crinkling and the edges of his lips turned up; thoroughly amused as he watches Kendall's gaze going up and down your body so quickly he would've missed it if he hadn't been directly looking at him.

His friend swallows thickly, then states, as loudly and clearly as he can, "Well, people do, hate you. Private equity, getting their meat hooks in, chiselling your profit like uh, like a vampire locust fuck."

"What is this? Is this a roast cos...if you haven't noticed I kinda have shit to do." Stewy punctuates the sentence by dipping his fingers lower, groaning at how easily they slip into your entrance. He always knew you weren't as innocent as you feigned - from the auspicious smile you'd given him the first time he took you, in the restroom at some pompous art exhibition, and now this. He's embarrassingly hard.

The tension in the air is thick and hazy, hanging over you, heat blooming in your stomach with every deliberate stroke of Stewy's fingers against your walls, the man watching only adding to the searing desire. Kendall Roy is an easily recognisable man. You chance a look at him: tall, impeccably dressed, strikingly handsome, far older than you.

Dark eyes meet your own, momentarily, a certain hunger within them, teeth digging into his lips, "Right, well, I'll cut to the chase."

"Okay."

"How about instead of taking us over, you give us four billion dollars; I stay boss, you stop raiding shitty companies for scraps, you invest for once in a blue collar corporation that's currently..."

He trails off at the sight of Stewy's fingers pushing into your mouth. The way your lips close around them, suck them, Kendall definitely isn't imagining your tongue swirling around them. And he's definitely not picturing those lips wrapped around his cock.

His oldest friend gives him a knowing look, waiting for him to elaborate, which he does, stammering out the rest of his pitch, "Yeah, right. You know, it's currently undervalued by some unfounded concerns about its leadership, i.e: the 'Lord Fuckleroy' here. But, you invest, the story twists, happy ending for all." 

Stewy pulls his fingers from your mouth, trailing them down the valley of your breasts, brushing over your pebbled nipples, before ghosting over your thighs, toying with the fabric of your shift. "Obviously, I don't usually take minority stake in a company."

"Yeah obviously, because you're..." Kendall starts, then sighs. It's becoming increasingly hard for him to focus when Stewy's edging closer to your core again, the way your breath hitches telling him he's reached his target again. He folds his arms, "How about for once, you make things bigger? You know, with your old pal?"

Stewy suddenly plunges his fingers deeper than before, curling them and you can't help the needy cry that leaves your lips. He outright laughs, the sound dark and gruff as he shrugs to his 'old pal', "Bro, I can't even begin to think about this. But if I could, to sell it, I'd need boning stock."

"As long as we remain in control."

"Well," Stewy pauses when your hand finds purchase in the expensive fabric of his suit pants, self-restraint wearing thin, his hips chasing your touch, thrusting his fingers harder into you. "Effective control, okay. I'm also gonna need a board seat."

Despite Kendall's attempts to ignore the situation, the nervous rubbing of his neck gives away his discomposure. Still, his voice is strong, "Oh I'd force it on you, dude, for the optics. Shit hot CEO has some hot shit new money for investment. Yeah?"

"I'm not necessarily totally opposed to this notion."

"That's right, and luckily I speak Stewy. And that's Stewy for 'I've got a raging hard on for this." The moment the words leave his mouth he sees a barely suppressed bearded grin.

"If that isn't the pot calling the kettle a fucking minority," Stewy gestures to the sizeable tent pitching in the CEO's pants, brows raising comically. 

Kendall grimaces, adjusting his stance, "Oh, uh, sorry. But we're good, right?"

Stewy moves his fingers quicker, focusing on that spongy spot inside that has your face contorting with pleasure, pushing you towards orgasm and then his hand returns from your sticky thighs to pick up his glass. He raises it, "Yeah, we're good."

He rolls his eyes when you whine at the loss of contact, frustrated with his teasing. He takes a long sip of the bitter liquor, then before Kendall turns his back, adds, "But, just a thought. Why don't you...hang back for a bit? Celebrate?"

The insinuation clouds the air and before Kendall can even answer, he's being cut off, "I don't think-"

"What do you think, sweetheart?" His pet name has you in the palm of his hand, half smile on his face. "You want Ken to fuck you?"

You look nervous for a moment, but it quickly fades with the offer of being shared between two of the most powerful men in the city, "If...if he does."

"She's been practically soaked since you walked in. And you and Rava are done, right?"

"We're..." Kendall thinks back to the hurtful words exchanged, the emptiness of his bed. It's been weeks without contact, his sex drive through the wall. "We're separated, yes."

"And the banks not fucking you anymore, so how about you do some fucking of your own," as if he needs anymore convincing, Stewy's fingers are teasingly pulling the thin straps holding up your breasts. "Come on, it'll be just like old times."

Kendall tilts his head, looking past his friend to search your face for a moment, wondering if you're lust drunk or just fucking wasted. Then, he decides he doesn't really care. "Fuck it, yeah."

✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦✦✧✦

A/N: This is my first time writing in a while and this is quite short and probably riddled with mustakes buttttt would totally be up for a part 2 if people want it. Any feedback is much appreciated :)

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

New to your blog, and I’m so happy that you think around the issues rather than ‘bat shit crazy’ being the go to reason/excuse. Anyway I have always thought that one of the major problems was Andrew basically had a half in/half out deal, he had his Pitch at the Palace, a commercial operation which totally exploited the Royal connections. It was also said that whenever a tech company applied to ‘pitch’ they had to sign over a percentage of equity just to get a foot in the door.

So given that as a template it’s not surprising that Harry thought he could do the same, particularly if he believed his own publicity that he was ‘the favoured grandchild’, like his uncle was allegedly the favoured second son. Plus of course Andrew lives in the imposing Lodge, was ex-military, and if you believe the press ‘air miles Andy’ spent a lot of time in private planes piggybacking royal duties with a round of golf.

As with Harry’s uncle/godfather I believe there was genuine confusion when he was told he couldn’t have what he wanted and I think the stroppy exit was only supposed to force the Queen to bring him back and give him what they wanted. Harry seems obsessed with fairness, whether that’s Balmoral sausage distribution, the income from the Duchy of Cornwall, or getting the same deal as his uncle. You would think that someone with a world class education, coming from a thousand year old dynasty would have at some point grasped that life just isn’t fair, and you make the most of the cards you are given which though considerable aren’t enough for the DoS.

That's a really good point - Andrew had half in/half out for a really long time. Before Pitch at the Palace, he also had that Trade Representative gig where he basically flew around on private jets to private holidays drumming up business for the UK.

That seems to be where Harry and Meghan got some of their audacity from - if Andrew can do it, why can't we? Where they misstepped was probably in how aggressive their demands were and how aggressively they made them, which most likely caused the discussions to become hostile.

I think the stroppy exit was only supposed to force the Queen to bring him back and give him what they wanted. -> I agree. Harry probably didn't expect The Queen to call his bluff and that also caught him completely off-guard.

My theory is that Harry and Meghan only agreed to the one-year review period thinking that everything would go to shit without them and the palace would be begging them to come back. Well, that didn't happen so when it came time for the one-year review and no one was begging them to return, it made them angry and they began negotiating with Oprah for a tell-all to get their revenge. (The press release announcing the "no, they're still out" result of the one-year review was on February 19, 2021, and Oprah wasn't finalized until around that same time.)

[dailyanarchistposts]

G.3.5 Would individualist anarchists have accepted “Austrian” economics?

One of the great myths perpetrated by “anarcho”-capitalists is the notion that “anarcho”-capitalism is simply individualist anarchism plus “Austrian” economics. Nothing could be further from the truth, as is clear once the individualist anarchist positions on capitalist property rights, exploitation and equality are understood. Combine this with their vision of a free society as well as the social and political environment they were part of and the ridiculous nature of such claims become obvious.

At its most basic, Individualist anarchism was rooted in socialist economic analysis as would be expected of a self-proclaimed socialist theory and movement. The “anarcho”-capitalists, in a roundabout way, recognise this with Rothbard dismissing the economic fallacies of individualist anarchism in favour of “Austrian” economics. “There is,” he stated, “in the body of thought known as ‘Austrian economics,’ a scientific [sic!] explanation of the workings of the free market … which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their so political and social Weltanshauung. But to do this, they must throw out the worthless excess baggage of money-crankism and reconsider the nature and justification of the economic categories of interest, rent and profit.” Yet Rothbard’s assertion is nonsense, given that the individualist anarchists were well aware of various justifications for exploitation expounded by the defenders of capitalism and rejected everyone. He himself noted that the “individualist anarchists were exposed to critiques of their economic fallacies; but, unfortunately, the lesson, despite the weakness of Tucker’s replies, did not take.” [“The Spooner-Tucker Doctrine: An Economist’s View”, Op. Cit., p. 14] As such, it seems like extremely wishful thinking that the likes of Tucker would have rushed to embrace an economic ideology whose basic aim has always been to refute the claims of socialism and defend capitalism from attacks on it.

Nor can it be suggested that the individualist anarchists were ignorant of the developments within bourgeois economics which the “Austrian” school was part of. Both Tucker and Yarros, for example, attacked marginal productivity theory as advocated by John B. Clark. [Liberty, no. 305] Tucker critiqued another anarchist for once being an “Anarchistic socialist, standing squarely upon the principles of Liberty and Equity” but then “abandon[ing] Equity by repudiating the Socialistic theory of value and adopting one which differs but little, if any, from that held by the ordinary economist.” [Op. Cit., no. 80, p. 4] So the likes of Tucker were well aware of the so-called marginalist revolution and rejected it.

Somewhat ironically, a key founders of “Austrian” economics was quoted favourably in Liberty but only with regards to his devastating critique of existing theories of interest and profit. Hugo Bilgram asked a defender of interest whether he had “ever read Volume 1 of Böhm-Bawerk’s ‘Capital and Interest’” for in this volume “the fructification theory is … completely refuted.” Bilgram, needless to say, did not support Böhm-Bawerk’s defence of usury, instead arguing that restrictions in the amount of money forced people to pay for its use and ”[t]his, and nothing else, [causes] the interest accruing to capital, regarding which the modern economists are doing their utmost to find a theory that will not expose the system of industrial piracy of today.” He did not exclude Böhm-Bawerk’s theory from his conclusion that “since every one of these pet theories is based on some fallacy, [economists] cannot agree upon any one.” The abolition of the money monopoly will “abolish the power of capital to appropriate a net profit.” [Op. Cit., no. 282, p. 11] Tucker himself noted that Böhm-Bawerk “has refuted all these ancient apologies for interest — productivity of capital, abstinence, etc.” [Op. Cit., no. 287, p. 5] Liberty also published a synopsis of Francis Tandy’s Voluntary Socialism, whose chapter 6 was “devoted to an analysis of value according to the marginal utility value of Böhm-Bawerk. It also deals with the Marxian theory of surplus value, showing that all our economic ills are due to the existence of that surplus value.” [Op. Cit., no. 334, p. 5] Clearly, then, the individualist anarchists were aware of the “Austrian” tradition and only embraced its critique of previous defences of non-labour incomes.

We have already critiqued the “time preference” justification for interest in section C.2.7 so will not go into it in much detail here. Rothbard argued that it “should be remembered by radicals that, if they wanted to, all workers could refuse to work for wages and instead form their own producers’ co-operatives and wait for years for their pay until the producers are sold to the consumers; the fact that they do not do so, shows the enormous advantage of the capital investment, wage-paying system as a means of allowing workers to earn money far in advance of the sale of their products.” And how, Professor Rothbard, are these workers to live during the years they wait until their products are sold? The reason why workers do not work for themselves has nothing to do with “time preference” but their lack of resources, their class position. Showing how capitalist ideology clouds the mind, Rothbard asserted that interest (“in the shape of ‘long-run’ profit”) would still exist in a “world in which everyone invested his own money and nobody loaned or borrowed.” [Op. Cit., p. 12] Presumably, this means that the self-employed worker who invests her own money into her own farm pays herself interest payments just as her labour income is, presumably, the “profits” from which this “interest” payment is deducted along with the “rent” for access to the land she owns!

So it seems extremely unlikely that the individualist anarchists would have considered “Austrian” economics as anything other than an attempt to justify exploitation and capitalism, like the other theories they spent so much time refuting. They would quickly have noted that “time preference”, like the “waiting”/“abstinence” justifications for interest, is based on taking the current class system for granted and ignoring the economic pressures which shape individual decisions. In Tucker’s words (when he critiqued Henry George’s argument that interest is related to time) “increase which is purely the work of time bears a price only because of monopoly.” The notion that “time” produced profit or interest was one Tucker was well aware of, and refuted on many occasions. He argued that it was class monopoly, restrictions on banking, which caused interest and “where there is no monopoly there will be little or no interest.” If someone “is to be rewarded for his mere time, what will reward him save [another]‘s labour? There is no escape from this dilemma. The proposition that the man who for time spent in idleness receives the product of time employed in labour is a parasite upon the body industrial is one which … [its supporters] can never successfully dispute with men who understand the rudiments of political economy.” [Liberty, no. 109, p. 4 and p. 5] For Joshua King Ingalls, “abstinence” (or the ability to “wait,” as it was renamed in the late nineteenth century) was “a term with which our cowardly moral scientists and political economists attempt to conjure up a spirit that will justify the greed of our land and money systems; by a casuistry similar to that which once would have justified human slavery.” [“Labor, Wages, And Capital. Division Of Profits Scientifically Considered,” Brittan’s Quarterly Journal, I (1873), pp. 66–79]

What of the economic justification for that other great evil for individualist anarchists, rent? Rothbard attacked Adam Smith comment that landlords were monopolists who demanded rent for nature’s produce and like to reap where they never sowed. As he put it, Smith showed “no hint of recognition here that the landlord performs the vital function of allocating the land to its most productive use.” [An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought, vol. 1, p. 456] Yet, as Smith was well aware, it is the farmer who has to feed himself and pay rent who decides how best to use the land, not the landlord. All the landlord does is decide whether to throw the farmer off the land when a more profitable business opportunity arrives (as in, say, during the Highland clearances) or that it is more “productive” to export food while local people starve (as in, say, the great Irish famine). It was precisely this kind of arbitrary power which the individualist anarchists opposed. As John Beverley Robinson put it, the “land owner gives nothing whatever, but permission to you to live and work on his land. He does not give his product in exchange for yours. He did not produce the land. He obtained a title at law to it; that is, a privilege to keep everybody off his land until they paid him his price. He is well called the lord of the land — the landlord!” [Patterns of Anarchy, p. 271]

Significantly, while Rothbard attacked Henry George’s scheme for land nationalisation as being a tax on property owners and stopping rent playing the role “Austrian” economic theory assigns it, the individualist anarchists opposed it because, at best, it would not end landlordism or, at worse, turn the state into the only landlord. In an unequal society, leasing land from the state “would greatly enhance the power of capitalism to engross the control of the land, since it would relieve it of the necessity of applying large amounts in purchasing land which it could secure the same control of by lease … It would greatly augment and promote the reign of the capitalism and displace the independent worker who now cultivates his own acres, but who would be then unable to compete with organised capital … and would be compelled to give up his holding and sink into the ranks of the proletariat.” [Joshua King Ingalls, Bowman N. Hall, “Joshua K. Ingalls, American Individualist: Land Reformer, Opponent of Henry George and Advocate of Land Leasing, Now an Established Mode”, pp. 383–96, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 4, p. 394]

Given Tucker’s opposition to rent, interest and profit is should go without saying that he rejected the neo-classical and “Austrian” notion that a workers’ wages equalled the “marginal product,” i.e. its contribution to the production process (see section C.2 for a critique of this position). Basing himself on the socialist critique of classical economics developed by Proudhon and Marx, he argued that non-labour income was usury and would be driven to zero in a genuinely free market. As such, any notion that Tucker thought that workers in a “free market” are paid according to their marginal product is simply wrong and any claim otherwise shows a utter ignorance of the subject matter. Individualist anarchists like Tucker strongly believed that a truly free (i.e. non-capitalist) market would ensure that the worker would receive the “full product” of his or her labour. Nevertheless, in order to claim Tucker as a proto-“anarcho”-capitalist, “anarcho”-capitalists may argue that capitalism pays the “market price” of labour power, and that this price does reflect the “full product” (or value) of the worker’s labour. As Tucker was a socialist, we doubt that he would have agreed with the “anarcho”-capitalist argument that market price of labour reflected the value it produced. He, like the other individualist anarchists, was well aware that labour produces the “surplus value” which was appropriated in the name of interest, rent and profit. In other words, he very forcibly rejected the idea that the market price of labour reflects the value of that labour, considering “the natural wage of labour is its product” and “that this wage, or product, is the only just source of income.” [Instead of a Book, p. 6]

Liberty also favourably quoted a supporter of the silver coinage, General Francis A. Walker, and his arguments in favour of ending the gold standard. It praised his argument as “far more sound and rational than that of the supercilios, narrow, bigoted monomentallists.” Walker attacked those “economists of the a priori school, who treat all things industrial as if they were in a state of flux, ready to be poured indifferently into any kind of mould or pattern.” These economists “are always on hand with the answer that industrial society will ‘readjust’ itself to the new conditions” and “it would not matter if wages were at any time unduly depressed by combinations of employers, inasmuch as the excess of profits resulting would infallibly become capital, and as such, constitute an additional demand for labour … It has been the teaching of the economists of this sort which has so deeply discredited political economy with the labouring men on the one hand, and with practical business men on the other.” The “greatest part of the evil of a diminishing money supply is wrought through the discouragement of enterprise.” [Liberty, no. 287, p. 11] Given that the “Austrian” school takes the a priori methodology to ridiculous extremes and is always on hand to defend “excess of profits”, “combinations of employers” and the gold standard we can surmise Tucker’s reaction to Rothbard’s pet economic ideology.

Somewhat ironically, give Rothbard’s attempts to inflict bourgeois economics along with lots of other capitalist ideology onto individualist anarchism, Kropotkin noted that supporters of “individualist anarchism … soon realise that the individualisation they so highly praise is not attainable by individual efforts, and … [some] abandon the ranks of the anarchists, and are driven into the liberal individualism of the classical economists.” [Anarchism, p. 297] “Anarcho”-capitalists confuse the ending place of ex-anarchists with their starting point. As can be seen from their attempt to co-opt the likes of Spooner and Tucker, this confusion only appears persuasive by ignoring the bulk of their ideas as well as rewriting the history of anarchism.

So it can, we think, be save to assume that Tucker and other individualist anarchists would have little problem in refuting Rothbard’s economic fallacies as well as his goldbug notions (which seem to be a form of the money monopoly in another form) and support for the land monopoly. Significantly, modern individualist anarchists like Kevin Carson have felt no need to embrace “Austrian” economics and retain their socialist analysis while, at the same time, making telling criticisms of Rothbard’s favourite economic ideology and the apologetics for “actually existing” capitalism its supporters too often indulge in (Carson calls this “vulgar libertarianism”, wherein right-“libertarians” forget that the current economuy is far from their stated ideal when it is a case of defending corporations or the wealthy).

[allthecanadianpolitics]

Members of the Brandon University Faculty Association (BUFA) have voted in favour of a strike mandate. Nearly 87 percent of the organization’s membership – which represents around 260 full-time faculty members and 90 contract staff – cast ballots in support of taking job action as part of an electronic referendum. Ballots were cast until midnight Saturday. According to the union, negotiations have remained at a standstill following a dispute over language used in the collective agreement between faculty members and Brandon University. On Jan. 19, 2023, BUFA members ratified their negotiating team’s mandate to bargain for better equity, diversity, inclusion, decolonization and Indigenization language. They have also been pushing for a better workload, compensation, academic freedom and governance, according to the union.

Continue Reading

Tagging @politicsofcanada

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Feb 17, 2024

This is how it begins. “Why not add your pronouns to your email signature?” “Why not announce your pronouns at the beginning of meetings?” “Why not encourage your staff members to ask for pronouns in day-to-day conversation?” After all, it’s just about being compassionate and creating a more “inclusive” work environment. Only a bigot would object to that…

It’s this kind of skewed reasoning that has led to the firing of Fran Itkoff, a 90-year-old volunteer for the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, who simply expressed confusion when faced with a request that she add pronouns to her emails. “I had seen it on a couple of letters that had come in after the person’s name”, Itkoff said in an interview, “but I didn’t know what it meant”.

We can hardly be surprised when a nonagenarian is befuddled by this strange new quasi-religious ritual, so rapidly has the practice taken hold. This didn’t stop the National MS Society from turning its back on Itkoff, a volunteer whose commitment to the charity dated back for six decades. For committing heresy against the Holy Creed of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Itkoff was immediately sacrificed. The statement issued by the National MS Society claimed that her query about pronouns was “viewed as not aligning with our policy of inclusion”.

Declaring pronouns makes little sense in any case, given that they are used in place of a name when talking about someone, not to someone. And besides, human beings are perfectly capable of determining someone’s sex without being told, usually instantaneously. Of course, according to activists, all of this is irrelevant. We are assured that sex has been superseded by “gender identity”, that mysterious sense of self that few of us believe even exists. It would be like being told to announce the colour of your aura every time you began a conversation. 

Like the vast majority of the population, I use pronouns to denote the biological sex of the person to whom I’m referring. And I certainly would not comply if commanded to declare my own due to my innate aversion to any form of compelled speech. The lessons of history are clear: when those in authority begin to demand the use of certain phrases, they have taken the first step on the pathway to tyranny. I do not wish to see a future in which we are forced to stand in lockstep and chant the approved slogans of the ruling class. 

Of course, the declaration of pronouns is far removed from any such scenario, but the principle to me is sacrosanct. I will not be told what to say by anyone, least of all those who claim to know what is best for the good of society. Authoritarians have always couched their demands in faux-benevolence, and we have seen how gender ideologues have a particular tendency to viciousness and bullying. “Be kind… or else” is not a maxim to which I am willing to capitulate. 

To ask for pronouns in the workplace is the equivalent of suggesting that employees pledge fealty to a deity they do not worship. It is a kind of test, a way to ensure that the tenets of Critical Social Justice – otherwise known as “wokeness” – are being observed. Spinoza argued that for any man to “be compelled to speak only according to the dictates of the supreme power” is a violation of his “indefeasible natural right” to be “the master of his own thoughts”. Once you agree to make statements in favour of a belief-system you do not hold, you are surrendering your agency to those who will exploit it. 

While the declaration of pronouns remains a purely voluntary matter, it is fair to say that no-one’s free speech is being violated. But the consequences for non-compliance in the workplace are becoming increasingly severe. Members of staff are passed over for promotion, they are smeared as unreconstructed bigots and “transphobes”, and eventually shunned and isolated. I have written before about friends of mine in the acting profession who feel uncomfortable in stating pronouns at the beginning of rehearsals, but know that they are unlikely to be recast if they refuse. This may not be compulsion, but it is coercion.

We see the same phenomenon on social media, where trans rights activists routinely denounce and defame those guilty of the crime of “misgendering”. They report users in the hope of seeing them banned, contact employers and claim to feel “unsafe”, and even occasionally call the police. This is the essence of cancel culture. They are, of course, free to criticise, even in a robust and rude manner. But to seek to destroy someone’s livelihood for their choice of language is fundamentally authoritarian. 

In the same vein, we have seen a handful of gender-critical feminists attacking people online for choosing to use “preferred pronouns” in certain cases. Again, the criticism is valid, but once it strays into the realm of libel, misrepresentation and character assassination, these critics are merely borrowing from the playbook of trans activists. In the tenor of some of these online free-for-alls, it has been difficult to tell one faction from the other. 

When it comes to the declaration of pronouns, I have often wondered how long it would take before requests transformed into demands. The sacking of Fran Itkoff by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society has the ring of inevitability about it. Many of us saw this coming. This is why we need to be vigilant against anyone who attempts to compel the speech of others, for whatever reason, and in whatever context. If we tolerate this inchmeal erosion of our liberties, we will doubtless live to regret it. 

--

If you haven't been following it, Fran Itkoff is a 90 year old woman who volunteered for the MS Society for sixty years after her husband had MS (multiple sclerosis). She didn't understand what all this talk about pronouns was about, asked, and was then told her volunteering services were no longer required.

Some of you may well go, "ew, LibsOfTikTok, ew, ew." Okay, but hear me out: shut up and read the screenshots. They tell the story.

Kali Kumor is the stupid little girl who removed a woman who had dedicated her life, and worked longer than this vacuous apparatchik has been alive, to helping others.

One supposes that all the MS in the world has been cured, given how eager they are to tell dedicated volunteers that they're no longer needed.

--

A few years ago, there was a fuss about atheists being turned away from volunteering activities.

This is the same principle: adherence to their dogmatic ideology supersedes what is supposed to be their organization's mission and purpose: their "telos". This is why you cannot have two "teloi." One will always win over the other.

This is what I mean by ideological capture. The telos of the MS Society is no longer services and support for those with MS, it's "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion." That's their number one objective. And that means pronoun-policing and excommunicating those who aren't part of the cult.

It would seem both humorous, being so petty and stupid, and sad, given Fran's long service to the organization, but as Andrew Doyle points out, it's more insidious than that. It's compelled speech. It's about punishing those who will decline to be part of - or even simply don't understand - the fundamentalist, puritan religious ideology these fanatics have adopted and imbued throughout the organization.

Just as you must testify to Jesus as your lord and savior in order to volunteer at a soup kitchen or to raise money for cancer, they will demand you adhere to the belief in gender thetans in mismatched meat prisons in order to volunteer for the MS Society. In the name of "Inclusion,"

As Fran mentions, the MS Society has always been inclusive, but what she doesn't understand is that it's now Inclusive™, a brand name which doesn't mean including as many people as possible but including as many members of their cult as possible.

They're not looking for behaviors - e.g. respect, tolerance, etc - they're looking for beliefs. Enforcing a particular ideological belief system. They don't care that you might be an atheist who subscribes to secular humanism, or you could be a Xian who believes we're all children of God, they want to make you believe what they believe.

Resist it. They'll try to act like you're just being unreasonable for a small accommodation, but they know that it's how they get you to start complying with their demands. Like Islam, it's one little thing at a time. Don't draw pictures of Muhammad, that's not a big ask is it? Then it's respecting the Quran, then it's not blaspheming Muhammad or Allah, and so on.

[beautifulpersonpeach]

It’s impossible to not love jikook.

Their chemistry is so natural, so effortless, so comfortable. Whatever brain cell Jungkook has you know Jimin shares it. They complement each other in their physical athleticism, in their easygoing / mischievous / crackhead personalities, in their competitiveness, in even how they relate to the other five members.

I’m yet to watch the full RUN episode, I’ve only seen some clips some friends have sent me while I run to a work lunch, but now I’ve got this silly smile on my face because two men I love, Jimin and Jungkook, exist on the same planet I do.

In other news, HYBE is giving a masterclass in class compared to the dumpster fire that is SM right now, though at this point with how deplorable SM’s management have behaved recently, that’s not even saying much. The latest HYBE financials confirm what I’ve said in my last few posts on HYBE’s corporate news i.e. HYBE not neglecting BTS and how BTS continues to be the primary revenue driver even on ‘hiatus’ (I think I recall @guacamoli-avocadorado sending an ask on this. HYBE’s latest filings are available on their website so you can confirm, but I’m sure there are also screengrabs all over Twitter at this point. Just FYI 💜.) It’s also confirmed Jimin will release PJM1 in March.

For the other anon who just sent in an ask on the downside of this SM deal for HYBE - HYBE has already gotten their pound of flesh in terms of LSM’s stake (consensus view is the injunction is in his favour), a validation of the business mode HYBE developed years ago that SM now wants to replicate in their SM 3.0 plan, and SM’s management has single-handedly done most of the damage to their brand already. But then again, they’d damaged their brand years ago when several of their own artists filed lawsuits detailing extreme physical abuse, when the company was fined for fraud several times, when the ceo wound up on Interpol’s most wanted list, when SM bought Woolim Entertainment to shelf Infinite and every other talent under that agency, etc. It didn’t stop the wider k-pop fandom/industry from developing selective blindness and amnesia to all this though, neither did it stop SM from continuing verifiably corrupt dealings. So despite this latest embarrassment only being more so because of international eyes on this mess, expect the status quo from the wider k-pop space to remain by year-end. HYBE will maintain a notable equity interest they can monetize later, and likely some influence on management decisions.

Back to jikook, I’m so excited for what they both will get up to this year. Jungkook said he isn’t working on anything right now, but that guy has been writing finished songs since 2016 at least, already has a vision for his solo debut (multiple MVs, possibly for each song on the album, choreography, possibly including drumming performances in videos or live, likely a new slew of collaborators, etc), plus it’s only February. As 2023 has shown us so far, a lot can change in very little time, so I’m not worried about JK at all. He’s taking a breather, something very necessary for creatives (much less introverted creatives), and he’s been working full time for 10 years.

Jimin will bring sauce and heat and tears in his new album. I have zero doubts. Prepare your bank accounts and stay hydrated. 💜

[talaricula]

Hiya, just out of curiosity if you dont mind me asking. What do you think the serious dealbreakers with PVDA you mentioned in your tags are?

Yeah sure! For context - my political stance is v much "human rights lawyer" first and foremost, which I'd situate in ideological terms as democratic socialism + humanism (for lack of a better/less archaic term). Basically, my politics are informed by a fundamental bottoms-up centering of (individual and collective) human rights and the inalienable and uncompromisable value of (individual and collective) human life, dignity and happiness. Not to "no true scotsman" bc I know that a fuckton of leftists and socialists define their leftism according to other measures, but I, personally, fundamentally do not get how you can hold leftist beliefs and yet be willing to compromise on the fundamental value of human life, dignity and rights. This stance is where my dealbreakers come from. Explanation under the cut:

So, in this context: I find the PvdA to be largely hypocritical in their stance on many important issues, and imo this hypocrisy is rooted in a loyalty to abstract ideology (communism/Marxism) over what should imo be the concrete foundation of that ideology (human dignity, structural equity, etc). Most importantly, I refuse to vote for them bc I find their stance (as demonstrated by repeated votes in Parliament, even if they often state otherwise in communication) on the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the human rights violations committed by China against the Uyghurs absolutely unforgivable, and increasingly so as compared to their very vocal stance on Israeli occupation of Palestine - either you condemn genocide and crimes against humanity or you don't. Picking and choosing is morally bankrupt imo, and revelatory of 1. the party's loyalty to (historically) communist countries over its loyalty to oppressed people and 2. yes, as revealed by the contrast, antisemitism, which has been a problem with the PvdA since long before October 7th and has been one of my dealbreakers forever as well (as it is for most European far-left parties, tbh). (Beyond the generalised antisemitism within the party, I also feel they excuse too much racism in general in order to appeal to the "white proletariat" that remains their primary voting base.)

More specifically for less huge dealbreakers, if you look at their party program and their answers to the stemtest questions etc, they're also just an annoyingly populist party that frames their surface communication to appeal to knee-jerk reactions but hide their actual stances in convoluted language - I compared the Groen and PvdA stances on many issues, and regularly the PvdA would say they were in favour of smth Groen was against or vice-versa, and then I'd read the explanation and the thing both parties actually wanted was the exact same thing, except the PvdA wanted to appear more radical than they actually were (ex.: PvdA said they were in favour of strikers blocking fellow workers' access to their place of employment while Groen said they were against it, turns out both parties were actually just in favour of striking booths to allow strikers to encourage fellow workers to strike without actually blocking their way into the building). I don't like it, it's paying lip service to appear more progressive than other left-wing parties and it rarely actually is. Another example of this is that they are against projects and education about gender identity in schools bc "imposing an agenda upon youingsters may be counterproductive and we should focus on supporting bottoms-up initiatives" which is a very nice way of framing a stance that fundamentally means "queer youth should be willing to endanger themsel ves by proposing queer-related projects to their peers and teachers and only then will we provide them with education and support - no of course this is not a way of de facto lowering the amount of queer education in schools and the exposure of minors to queer issues what do you meaaan".

Less dealbreaker and more general ideological disagreement: I'm just not a Marxist. I think the class struggle is very real, but I disagree with the PvdA's way of lifting it above all other forms of inequity and of ignoring the role other forms of structural oppression plays in class oppression. I disagree with their decentering of other forms of/structural/intersectional oppression which in my opinion and according to my research are fundamental to the cycle of oppression necessary to create a "lower class". I also (hence my vote for Groen) disagree with their decentering of ecology in favour of industry-focused "workers' solidarity", bc climate change will affect the most oppressed and vulnerable among us first and thus is not at all a "privileged Western bourgeois" issue.

But yes, TL;DR: my dealbreaker with the PvdA is its loyalty to (historically) communist countries and abstract leftist (Communist/Marxist) ideology over its loyalty to and solidarity with actual, real, concrete oppressed people.

[jessbrownz]

Investment Property Loans Made Simple

Investing in property holds the promise of financial freedom, yet navigating the world of investment property loans can seem daunting. With NZ Mortgages as your guide, you can embark on this journey with confidence. Let’s delve into the fundamentals of investment property loans, so that you get  clarity and insight to get  on the path to realising your financial goals.

Understanding Investment Property Loans

Investment property loans differ from traditional home loans in several key aspects. While both involve borrowing money to purchase property, investment loans are specifically tailored for properties that are not occupied by the owner. These loans typically have higher interest rates and stricter eligibility criteria due to the increased risk associated with investment properties.

Types of Investment Property Loans

Fixed Rate Loans:

With a fixed-rate loan, the interest rate remains constant throughout the loan term, providing stability and predictability in repayments. This option is ideal for investors seeking protection against potential interest rate fluctuations.

Variable Rate Loans:

Variable rate loans are subject to changes in interest rates, which can either increase or decrease over time. While this option offers flexibility and the potential for lower interest rates, it also carries the risk of higher repayments if rates rise.

Interest-Only Loans:

Interest-only loans allow investors to pay only the interest portion of the loan for a specified period, typically five to 10 years. This can provide short-term cash flow benefits by reducing monthly repayments, but borrowers must be prepared for higher repayments once the interest-only period ends.

Eligibility and Requirements

Before applying for an investment property loan, it's essential to understand the eligibility criteria and requirements set forth by lenders. Key factors that lenders consider include:

Credit Score:

A strong credit score demonstrates a borrower's ability to manage debt responsibly and is a crucial factor in determining eligibility for an investment loan.

Debt-to-Income Ratio:

Lenders assess the borrower's debt-to-income ratio to ensure they have sufficient income to cover loan repayments. Lower ratios indicate less financial strain and may improve loan approval chances.

Loan-to-Value Ratio (LTV):

The LTV ratio compares the loan amount to the property's value, with lower ratios typically resulting in more favourable loan terms. Lenders may require a higher deposit for investment loans to mitigate risk.

Benefits of Investing in Property

Investing in property offers numerous benefits that can contribute to long-term financial stability and growth:

Rental Income:

Investment properties generate rental income, providing a steady stream of cash flow that can be used to cover loan repayments and expenses.

Capital Appreciation:

Over time, property values tend to increase, allowing investors to build equity and potentially realise capital gains on selling the property.

Tax Advantages:

Property investors may benefit from tax deductions on mortgage interest, property depreciation, and other expenses, reducing their overall tax liability.

While investment property loans offer opportunities for wealth creation, it's crucial to be aware of potential risks and considerations:

Market Volatility:

Property markets can be subject to fluctuations in supply and demand, economic conditions, and government policies. Investors should conduct thorough market research and risk assessments to mitigate exposure to volatility.

Vacancy and Cash Flow:

Vacancies in rental properties can disrupt cash flow and impact loan repayments. Investors should budget for potential vacancies and have contingency plans in place to cover expenses during lean periods.

Property Maintenance and Management:

Owning an investment property entails responsibilities such as maintenance, repairs, and tenant management. Investors should budget for these expenses and consider outsourcing property management services if needed.

Interest Rate Risks:

Variable rate loans are susceptible to changes in interest rates, which can affect borrowing costs and cash flow. Investors should assess their risk tolerance and consider strategies such as fixing interest rates or creating buffers to mitigate interest rate risks.

Working with NZ Mortgages

NZ Mortgages specialises in helping investors navigate the complexities of investment property loans. With our expertise and personalised approach, we empower clients to make informed decisions and achieve their financial objectives. Our services include:

Loan Comparison:

We offer a wide range of loan options from various lenders, allowing clients to compare rates, terms, and features to find the best fit for their investment strategy.

Expert Advice:

Our team of mortgage professionals provides personalised guidance and support throughout the loan application process, ensuring a smooth and seamless experience from start to finish.

Ongoing Support:

Beyond securing financing, we remain committed to our clients' success, offering ongoing support and resources to help them maximise the return on their investment property portfolio.

Strategies for Success

To maximise returns and mitigate risks when investing in property, consider the following strategies:

Diversification:

Diversifying your investment portfolio across different property types, locations, and asset classes can help spread risk and enhance long-term returns. Consider investing in residential, commercial, and mixed-use properties to diversify your portfolio.

Research and Due Diligence:

Conduct thorough research and due diligence before investing in a property. Evaluate factors such as location, property condition, rental demand, and potential for capital appreciation to make informed investment decisions.

Financial Planning:

Develop a comprehensive financial plan that accounts for your investment goals, risk tolerance, cash flow projections, and exit strategies. Consider working with financial advisers and mortgage brokers to optimise your investment strategy and financing options.

Regular Review and Monitoring:

Regularly review and monitor your investment portfolio to assess performance, identify opportunities for optimisation, and make necessary adjustments to your strategy. Stay informed about market trends, regulatory changes, and economic developments that may impact your investments.

Conclusion:

Investment property loans represent a gateway to financial freedom, and with NZ Mortgages by your side, the journey becomes simpler and more rewarding. By understanding the nuances of investment lending and leveraging the expertise of our team, you can confidently pursue your investment goals and build a brighter financial future. Contact NZ Mortgages today and unlock the potential of property investment.

[lionessstephanie]

I have a serious question for Transfolk. What's next?

After there is global acceptance of trans people, after everyone is allowed to change their gender with no limitations. After it's put into laws that you can be trans, or genderfluid or non-binary, what's next?

What will changing your gender and refusing to be called a woman or man change. We'll still need a categorization for medical purposes, we'll need to know your sex when checking for symptoms of heart attack. You've created a more inclusive term "uterus havers", "menstruators" etc but how are these different from man/woman. Are uterus havers still not going to suffer from a gross misrepresentation in medical research, when they're in a car accident in a car that was trained on a penis haver dummy's body, will they not suffer like cis-women?

In a fight for more inclusive language regardless of equality/equity, are the people transitioning in and out not still sticking and benefiting/suffering from the same thing as their assigned birth gender. Rape statistics would just change to 90% of uterus havers instead of women. Already we see a difference between TW and TM when it comes to publicity and privilege, the patriarchy has automatically shifted to favour TW while TM only enjoy the reminiscent bystander privilege in the male class. When patriarchy accepts the existence of transfolk, it's just going to start benefiting people under a new name "penis-haver". Already the rapists, victim of rapists, incarcerated fellow for violent crime kind of follow the same pattern as their birth gender, when shelters for uterus havers who have suffered trauma from penis-havers pop up. What exactly is the difference? What exactly will change?

There's a push to normalize transwomen with dicks, feminine transmen, gender conforming nb people. No transition is needed to live your gender. Which is normal, a gender is not defined by clothes or structure but how is this different from the "boys can be feminine, women can be masculine" movement?

And what exactly is the plan to minimize the utter trainwreck that misogynists, capitalists etc are going to make of things while society makes a full transition. When a medication claims to be tested on both men and women and it was actually just tested on cis-men and trans-women and cis-women and trans-men suffer dearly. What language are we going to use to take them to court for violating the law?

[anxiously-kk]

😭😭 this is a reply to someone saying production is the real enemy for making comps that favour specific people (muscle men) is it true that if cirie got to play hoh again and was winning her fans would be celebrating? ya absolutely they’ll cheer for whatever as long as it helps cirie (as most people do for their faves i mean id have at least tolerated zombie week if it wasn’t the two worst people getting a second chance) but that doesn’t mean production doesn’t have issues they need to fix both with comp equity and game breaking twist rules. both can be true jags not at fault he’s playing with the game he’s been delt but if production’s stacked the deck there’s still a problem

edit: might i add that production changed the rules after they realized letting the jurors go home and talk to people and watch private strategic (and snarky) drs broke the game and made things unfair soooo

[bizypeople]

IWD2024

Dear Friend of BPW Strathfield I hope this message finds you well. 

With sincere excitement, the Business and Professional Women Strathfield (BPWS) cordially invites you to our upcoming International Women's Day event, scheduled for March 6th, 2024. 

This event, in collaboration with Burwood Council, Strathfield Council, and ACU Strathfield, aims to champion Gender Equity through Economic Empowerment and features a lineup of distinguished international and national speakers. 

International Women's Day holds immense significance, especially for our younger audience, who will be in attendance. As a committed member of your profession and a passionate advocate for gender equality and women's rights, your presence will not only mark this special occasion but also underscore your dedication to fostering understanding of gender equality, women's empowerment, and their pivotal roles in building an inclusive society.

Details: Event: International Women's Day Celebration - Gender Equity through Economic Empowerment 

Headline speaker: The Hon Jodie Harrison, MP. Member of the Legislative Assembly Member for Charlestown. Minister for Women, Minister for Seniors, and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. 

Speakers: Dean ACU, Assoc Professor Belinda von Mengersen, Jordon Baker SMD, Sweta Gupta BPWS President. Message from 3 International BPW Members and members of the UN Standing Committee. 

Date: Wednesday March 6th, 2024 Time: 10:00 am – 12:30 pm 

Venue: Australian Catholic University Strathfield, 25a Barker Rd, Strathfield 2135. 

Collaboration: Business & Professional Women Strathfield, Burwood Council, Strathfield Council, and Australian Catholic University Strathfield Campus. 

Your attendance is sure to leave you with a lasting impression. Should you have any specific requirements or require additional event information, please don't hesitate to contact us. 

We eagerly anticipate your favourable response and sincerely hope you will REGISTER and join us in this important celebration. 

Warm regards, Sweta Gupta President BPWS (0411228445) 

Janette Weeding Director BPWS (0411135295) 

[celticcrossanon]

Coronation of the Queen Consort

This is the only description I can find of the coronation of the last Queen Consort, Queen Elizabeth, known after the death of her husband as the Queen Mother.

Tis is from the Royal Gazette, https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/34453/supplement/7073

Comparing this to the description of the coronation of Queen Camilla, as per https://www.churchofengland.org/coronation/liturgy, I notice the following (see under the cut):

A There is no mention of Camilla leaving her chair and crossing to the altar to kneel and be crowned, as Queen Elizabeth did. Instead, I assume that Camilla will be crowned sitting in her chair, similarly to how the King is crowned sitting on St Edward's Chair (the throne with the Stone of Destiny in it).

B There is no mention of Camilla paying homage to the King, as Queen Elizabeth did to her husband King George VI and Prince Philip did to his wife Queen Elizabeth II. This implies that King Charles and Queen Camilla are of equal rank.

C When the Archbishop hands the Rod and Sceptre to Camilla, instead of saying a prayer, as was done for Queen Elizabeth, he says: Receive the Royal Sceptre and the Rod of equity and mercy. May the Spirit guide you in wisdom and grace, that by your service and ministry, justice and mercy may be seen in all the earth.

which is similar, but not identical, to what is said to the King when he receives the Rod and Sceptre:

Receive the Royal Sceptre, the ensign of kingly power and justice; and the Rod of equity and mercy, a symbol of covenant and peace.

May the Spirit of the Lord which anointed Jesus at his baptism, so anoint you this day, that you might exercise authority with wisdom, and direct your counsels with grace; that by your service and ministry to all your people, justice and mercy may be seen in all the earth: through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

D I don't know what words were said when Queen Elizabeth received her ring. Camilla gets hers with the words:

Receive this Ring, a symbol of royal dignity, and a sign of the covenant sworn this day.

and Charles was given his with the words:

Receive this Ring, a symbol of kingly dignity, and a sign of the covenant sworn this day between God and King, King and people.

Again, these are very similar words, but as I said, I don't know what was said to Queen Elizabeth (or to King George), so I don't know if these similarities are usual or not.

E Again, I don't know what words were said when Queen Elizabeth received her crown. Camilla gets hers with this prayer:

May thy servant Camilla, who wears this crown, be filled by thine abundant grace and with all princely virtues; reign in her heart, O King of love, that, being certain of thy protection, she may be crowned with thy gracious favour; through Jesus Christ our Lord.

This is the Prayer of Blessing said when Charles is crowned:

King of kings and Lord of lords, bless, we beseech thee, this Crown, and so sanctify thy servant Charles upon whose head this day thou dost place it for a sign of royal majesty, that he may be crowned with thy gracious favour and filled with abundant grace and all princely virtues; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with thee and the Holy Spirit liveth and reigneth, supreme over all things, one God, world without end.

Again, notice the similar words, especially the use of 'princely virtues', something that I believe is used of the monarch and no other person (AFAIK).

The similar wording of all the prayers may be traditional. I don't know. I don't have a written version of exactly what was said at the last coronation of a Queen Consort to compare the two.

At this point in time there are enough similarities between the two coronations, with no indication of Camilla's lower rank (being crowned kneeling at the altar, paying homage to the King), that I am wondering what is meant to be made of all this.

I may be worrying over nothing. On the day, it may be perfectly clear that Charles is the King and Camilla is his consort, not his equal in rank.