Agreed. The books are just as good as the show.
firebyte
joined 2 years ago
Depends on who you ask.
I'm not sure why Political Compass has them in the Authoritarian Right quadrant. It'd be nice to see how they calculate that standing.
They have had flecks of right-leaning authoritarian policies, such as off-shore detention for asylum claimants whilst processing their applications, though they are generally centre-left in our political sphere.
ABC's Vote Compass has them in the 'Economic Left', 'Socially Progressive' quadrant: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-11/vote-compass-federal-election-2019/10731602
From Wikipedia:
"The Australian Labor Party (ALP), also known as the Labor Party or simply Labor, is the major centre-left political party in Australia".
Come to Australia! The Australian Defence Force allows eligible U.S. citizens to join, and accepts lateral transfers, after some conditions have been met.
The ADF allows LGBTQI+ people to serve openly, and will even support transition for trans members.
And Australia is just awesome. We just re-elected, literally last weekend, a level-headed centre-left government, in what is very likely to be at least for two terms (2 x 3 years), given that the centre-right party was absolutely flogged in the polls. They fucked around with endorsing 'MAGA' politics and then found out, by winning less than half the seats required to form majority again.
Our electoral system generally keeps our politicians sane and centrist: mandatory voting for citizens (you get fined if you don't - we don't care who you vote for, just as long as you do); full preferential voting (aka ranked choice voting - where every candidate must be ranked), and a balanced Senate (different kind of ranked choice voting). No first-past-the-post shit that leads to extreme fringe parties gaining any serious power.
Criteria:
- be a New Zealand citizen, a citizen of the United Kingdom, United States of America or Canada
- be a permanent resident living in Australia or holding a 444 sub-class visa
- have lived in Australia for at least one year immediately prior to applying to join the ADF and
- have not served in a foreign military in the two years prior to applying to join the ADF
Overseas applicants with relevant military experience may be eligible to start a new career in the ADF and a new life in Australia through a lateral transfer. To be eligible, you must:
- be a current serving member, or separated less than 3 years ago from a foreign military service
- have no less than 5 years’ military experience
- hold qualifications, skills and experience that can be recognised by and directly transferred to the ADF
- meet the minimum academic and military educational standards required by the ADF
- be less than 55 years of age at the time of visa nomination
- be able to demonstrate 'Competent English' ability at the time of application, as defined on the Department of Home Affairs website.
https://www.adfcareers.gov.au/careers/joining/eligibility?side-tab=citizenship
What I'm saying is, you might feel like you're not misgendering, but if someone is binary and you use a non-binary pronoun, you are misgendering.
I don't disagree with your first statement.
However I do disagree with your second statement, quoted above, because it's so broad that even people trying to do the right thing, or least harmful thing, can be accused of misgendering or be policed by others for simply trying to be inclusive.
Whilst a technicality, it really rubs non-gender diverse people the wrong way, and makes it harder for gender diverse people, myself included, to drive broader acceptance of us in the community when all we're known for is telling others they're 'wrong' when they accidentally mess up a pronoun or three.
There's a very fine balance to be struck between being inclusive, and being correct.
If someone gets a person's gender wrong accidentally because they were unsure, that shouldn't, and doesn't in my view, count as misgendering simply because it was a misunderstanding.
However if someone deliberately, or maliciously refers to someone as their assigned gender at birth, that's misgendering which should absolutely be called out and derided.
But ... is that automatically anyone else's preference?
No, and that's the really hard part. Most would agree that 'they/them/they're' (and so on) is generally safer than a gendered pronoun if unsure. It's also really hard when someone's pronouns, again for those in the back: are just as valid as mine, aren't ones in common use.
There's a non-exhaustive list here: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/08/incomplete-list-gender-pronouns/
It's much easier with friends, as you'll generally get into a groove eventually. However, is less so with strangers.
Even asking someone's pronouns could be met with confused looks from time to time. Context matters. If I asked for the pronouns of a farmer with a thousand yard stare and sun-kissed leather skin to match in my part of the world, despite growing up in the country, I'd probably be punched in the face. 😂
Strong disagree. Using 'they/them' when you're generally unsure about a person's gender isn't misgendering.
I'm a binary trans woman. If someone is generally unsure about my gender, because it can be ambiguous from time to time, they/them when referring to me is perfectly acceptable. I would suggest most other people are fine with they/them in this instance as well.
Pronouns can be quite a minefield to navigate, especially for those not used to using they/them when all they've ever known is binary terms growing up.
Speaking as an 'elder' trans person, some pronouns in use, which are just as valid as mine!, are genuinely difficult to remember because there are so many of them. I'm talking about the ones that aren't part of the English language in common use. I default to 'they/them' in those instances because using the person's assigned gender at birth would be genuinely hurtful; I don't want to hurt someone.
I feel very much that our own, gender diverse, community is driving those outside of it away by being so strict with/overt policing of pronouns, that those who aren't gender diverse find the whole 'pronoun' thing too complicated, then either refuse to engage with us or deliberately misgender because its easier. This is especially true for older conservative cis people.
We didn't boot him out. He willingly, perhaps gleefully, did it himself.
He's not Australian. Cunt gave up his Australian citizenship to buy a U.S. TV station. And yet still believes he can manipulate us too.
As far as we're concerned, he's dead to us.
I'm not sure he's much more competent, especially when it comes to successfully undoing the damage just enough to keep the GOP in power, by the skin of their teeth, whilst still grifting everything that isn't welded down.
That, and he doesn't and likely will never have the cult of personality.
I'd wager that once he who shall not be named is removed from office, the rest of the party will implode into a self-interested factional civil war.
What are the chances of him being booted out via 25th Amendment in the next six months?
It might buy JD just enough time to prevent the Republicans being utterly wiped out in the mid-terms...
view more: next ›
The first rule of venturing into the Australian outback:
You become extremely hard to find wandering into the Australian wilderness. Many people have died this way thinking they'll 'walk to the nearest help', which may be hundreds of kilometres away, through hostile dangerous heat during the day and extreme cold during the night.