Facts > Feelings.

If you have XX chromosomes, you're female and thus a woman. Cutting off your tits or bolting on a Frankenphallus just makes you a woman with surgical alterations.
If you have XY chromosomes, you're male and thus a man. No amount of makeup, women's underwear, or stripteasing in front of children will change that.

Anything else is an aberration and, like a one-armed person or someone born without eyes, recognized defective. It doesn't make them less human, but the idea we should just pretend that's normal is a weird delusion.

No, you're wrong. Period.
Being transgender, like any mental illness, requires sympathy and care - not pretend-endorsement for political points and virtue signaling.

It's no more deserving of "respect" than any other human being, but it is worthy of pity. Some wiring has gone wrong in their heads; that's not their fault.

It's not 2022. Only the truly dogmatic believes that silly shit any more.

I didn't say evolution considered anything an error.
That would be stupid, evolution is a process.

But certainly a mutation that causes insanity IS an error in human evaluation..that is, unless the insanity has a political faction, then we'll shriek 1+1=3 because, well, politics.

I love you guys.
Dawkins when attacking Christianity and religion is a super genius, insightful, brilliant ... Until the moment he departs from the canon, now he's a fucking liar and obviously stupid.

Impossible.... IMPOSSIBLE that you might be wrong.

The frothing left can't stop itself from the purity spiral, driving even your allies right. Dawkins himself had to start looking at his intellectual allies and realize they might be the baddies.

You are great. Keep it up. Never change and certainly never, ever doubt yourself.

There are two sexes. Period.
Anything else is, by definition, aberrant & basically broken. Yes, biology makes many errors. Usually they die. Sometimes they don't.

It doesn't mean transgenders should be mistreated, they deserve our pity and whatever help they can get to be happy in their lives.

But fortunately the world has moved on from this absurd delusion that if you really really really pretend you're a donkey, you MUST BE ONE. That's silly. And... basically insane.

The process is such that the IEEPA refunds will proceed with the liquidation of the imports.

Customs basically finally closes a file (liquidates) about 315d after the entry. So if something was imported on July 1 2025, then May 12 2026 it would liquidate.
Importers having filed their CAPE data (which was super easy, took me about 15 mins for more than 1200 entries), those entries will be flagged for the return of the IEEPA duties plus interest, which is a usual customs thing.

Note that 'issuing the refund' and getting the refund $ actually might take a bit. Some brokers are suggesting it might take up to 60d for the funds to flow, or, it could just be CBP is awaiting June1, as the White House still has a chance to protest the CITA court ruling until then. (There is no suggestion they will but still, better to wait then have to un-de-retro-re-bill people for refunds that need to come back or whatever.)

Short version, it's not like these companies will suddenly get a giant pile of refunds; they will trickle back at (approximately) the frequency they went out last year.

"rent-seeking, gatekeeping storefronts taking 30% of every developer's revenue."

Right, so Steam should just build a massive distribution network for free then?
Literally nobody HAS to use their service to publish or buy computer games. It's flamingly successful because both developers and consumers get what they particularly want from such a service.

If it's so easy, build your own, charge 20% and drive steam out of business.

And as her +70.9% gains in 2024 were somewhat extraordinary, Nancy Pelosi spawned a host of similar apps - I believe autopilot has subsequently been broadened to include other lawmakers of both parties.

Autopilot
PelosiTracker.app
Quiver Quantitative

FWIW I fully agree with you that the PEOPLE of other races aren't themselves the problem.

The problem is the exploitative cleave-lines that leaves for opportunism in democracies. It's so much easier to blame easily-visually-identifiable "others" than actually address much more subtle and pervasive issues like poverty, drug abuse, etc.

I'd point to immigration as an example. The US is quite literally a nation of immigrants.
The most patriotic people I know are 0th or 1st-gen immigrants.The problem they immediately identify is that now the centrifugal forces seem to be winning - instead of new immigrants being encouraged to become American, they're pushed into factional enclaves and the melting pot is lost. (Their comments, not mine.)

LOL "flamebait" for describing the immediate replies accurately.

Pardon me for calling a spade a spade. I didn't mean to offend.

So you're saying that - literally - the whitest, most homogeneous society on earth is the best place to live, exemplary in structure, society, and well-being?

And insisting that's what ... complete coincidence?

Funny, that.

You neglected to factor in the fact the Musk - for ideological reasons, let's be clear - is hated almost as much as the Orange Tyrant on slashdot.

Meaning that facts-be-damned, Elon MUST somehow be made the bad guy. Even if that's irrelevant.
The simplest explanation - that he tossed some $ at an opensource competitor to Google, and then this entity took his $ and turned for-profit - must be discarded.

Look at the replies to your comment.
- "well Musk tried to buy it later" how does this matter to whether a business was funded on false premises?
- "well Musk was going to take it for-profit." Setting aside that this is essentially verbatim OpenAI's own argument against the suit, again, what Musk was "going to do" isn't relevant. Yes, whether it's on moral grounds or Elon being butthurt at being cut out, the point of "we take your $ as a nonprofit, turn it into a for-profit but keep your $" is the question.
- your daring to side with Musk means you apparently implicitly fellate Musk. Persuasive, certainly.
All of these, note, are 'climbing' in mod points.

I mean, it's pathological: Everyone here is largely against AI and Sam Altman...until Elon's the other side.

I fully agree with this move by the EU and do rather often approve their commonsense pro-consumer legislation.

As a small-government conservative, I believe it's one of the main remits of government to counter monopoly behavior. ... At the same time, I recognize that the EU isn't nearly democratic enough, and does unfortunately stray into overregulation / wealth-farming from "naughty capitalists" who dare to be successful/don't kowtow to the EU.

NEITHER the US model nor the EU models are great.

Not really.
Here is the report, finding it really didn't take a lot of chasing.
https://drive.google.com/file/...

I recommend you read https://www.nationalreview.com... as well. Putnam is clearly uncomfortable with his findings (credit to him for still honestly publishing the data; not sure that would happen in 2026), and so makes some leaps unsupported by what he presents, as in
"it's a short-term effect"...based on absolutely nothing in the report.
"we will find new ways to boost social solidarity." that's ideology and faith, not data.
He talks about the 'benefits outweighing the disadvantages' again, failing to prove anything about the benefits.

And yes, to your point all my data is American data. Absolutely agree that different scales apply to different contexts, nationalities, etc (Reference here Geert Hofstede's seminal work on cultural alignments and differences in such issues).

I find it curious and unsurprising in 2026 that my post - which was intended to be challenging - has been modded to -1 Troll. This is the case for nearly any unpopular political stance on Slashdot today.

"the best places to live in the world, in terms of health, happiness, and quality of life"
Are those our metrics now? Are they yours?

Men are happier than women.
Conservatives are happier than liberals.
People of faith are happier than those without.
If are seeking to make people happier, I'm surprised that you of all people would be advocating conservatism and faith.

Oh, also, actual data shows diverse neighborhoods are UNhappier, consistently. (in case you need the link: "The Downside of Diversity" https://www.nytimes.com/2007/0... )
What precisely are you going to advocate with that info?