Rather than distinctly male or female, the human brain is much more like the heart, kidneys and lungs – basically the same no matter the sex of the body it's in.
“This collapse is a telltale sign of a problem known as publication bias. Small, early studies which found a significant sex difference were likelier to get published than research finding no male-female brain difference.”
It's interesting, having a local backup of my blog, because sometimes I'll click on a post in the backup in order to see it on Tumblr proper, only to found out that the post has been deleted despite me never having deleted that post myself. Normally, when someone's blog is terminated, posts that other people have reblogged from them stay up and you just can't go to the original blog anymore. However, it's become obvious that sometimes, for reasons Tumblr has never fully elaborated, certain posts will be deleted along with all reblogs of that post.
On a totally unrelated note, check out this article:
For years the Israel on Campus Coalition—a little-known organization with links to Israeli intelligence—has used student informants to spy o
if you think about it, the social contract of the Car largely mirrors antiquated notions of patriarchial chivalry... the Big, Strong Automobile, which inherently has the power to maim and kill, must yield the right of way to the misogynized pedestrian, as a show of the Automobile's power & potential lethality. "ladies first," all in a world where more and more space is carved out day by day for the Automobile... now, contrast this with the locomotive, where all passengers are equal... thus you can see that not having a car is emasculating, having to ride public transportation with other people is emasculating, and women are even derided as being poorer drivers. Men do not like the train because it renders them effectively homosexual; they thrive on the upper end of inequality and feel like nothing without it. Taking the train is essentially lesbian frotting
I usually try to review cheeses virginally - that is, ones that I’ve never had before. In this case, this is a cheddar I’ve had many times before. But I couldn’t leave it off the blog, what with its obvious appeal to leather and rubber fetishists.
As far as cheddars go, Grafton’s 2-year aged isn’t going to shock you. It’s mild, light on the salt, with a slightly sweet and grassy flavour. It’s got a nice texture. It’s dense, more moist than I expected, and smooth.
So what is the deal with the gummi suit on this cheese anyway? Well, cheese has obviously been around a lot longer than fridges. Fresh cheeses like mozzarella are too moist to last very long outside of a cold place (bacteria and fungi do so love damp places), though I don’t think anyone was too mad about eating that stuff quickly. But cheeses that have been aged (and dried) more have some more preservation options, which is where cheese wax comes in. The wax is a physical barrier, stopping fungal spores from landing, and also blocks moisture and air, making the cheese a pretty unfriendly place to grow. Even drier cheeses can be bandaged in cheesecloth and then slathered in lard to preserve them while allowing some ventilation.
I gotta admit: hot wax isn’t really my thing. But cheesecloth bondage and grease… it has potential.
It is very painful to see my wife suffer in front of me because of her gunshot in the chest area and the inability to remove it due to medical negligence and lack of medical care.
Now I urgently need your help.
At least to reach 2000, the remaining 650 pounds to reach them will help me a lot in this difficult period.
My name is Mohammed ayesh from Gaza Recently, I started a new chapter in my li… Shelley Gordon needs your support for Support Ayesh’s family
Go to paypal.me/MAyesh674 and type in the amount. Since it’s PayPal, it's easy and secure. Don’t have a PayPal account? No worries.
i think we should be ridiculing them more for this. you don't get to try and go all "queer website" when your staff likes to go on nuking sprees targeting the trans fem users
would be remiss not to mention that the rainbow notably straight up just removed the trans flag colors from it. like they’re gone. it’s the progress flag minus the trans flag colors.
Longtime readers may be aware of how much I relish an excuse to bully a company, so I'm sharing the wealth;
Clothing company Patagonia is currently sueing drag queen Pattie Gonia for "irreparable” harm to their brand.
To be clear; Pattie named herself after the region in South America.
So Pattie is asking people to politely ask Patagonia to drop the lawsuit.
I'm extending the invitation to all of you, because sueing a drag queen for 'infringement' in the current political cultural landscape is vile.
Especially a drag queen who has raised millions of dollars for non-profits, uses her platform to raise awareness for climate activism, and fully aligns with Patagonia's apparent climate-conscious mission statement.
They're claiming they're sueing for $1. They're actually asking her to stop using her name, and pay over $1 million in legal fees. They're straight up harassing her.
In contrast, drag queen Jan Sport has a Jansport bag line. It's that easy to just... work with a queen.
Anyway. Be respectful(ish), but feel free to be annoying on Patagnoia's socials, asking them to 'DROP THE LAWSUIT'
This is being discussed heavily on Bluesky, such as here.
Patagonia is suing specifically for trademark infringement, and they're suing for the sum of $1. If they don't sue, then that means they could lose the trademark.
They aren't trying to "silence" them or prevent them from using the name, they're specifically protecting their company trademark. They'd have to sue *anyone* who was using such an obvious knockoff of their logo; in this case it happens to be a drag queen.
Go nuts.
The point is that this isn't a company trying to dogpile on a drag queen, it's a company following a standard legal practice to protect its trademark. Disney does it all the time.
If you get a soda out of a vending machine and it has a Coca-Cola label but it's actually a knockoff made with ditchwater, that's obviously okay because Coca-Cola is a huge corporation and it's thus fine for someone to violate their trademark.
You can hate Patagonia all you want, but the lawsuit is about anodyne trademark law, not specifically that a drag queen is involved.
if Patagonia loses their trademark, which they would if they didn't sue and win (again for one dollar), there would be no assurance against people putting a Patagonia label on amy dogshit
Oh my fucking god y’all bootlickers are driving me crazy.
I’m a law student specializing in Intellectual Property, which includes Copyright and Trademark. I’ve studied these subjects and the law is clear that everything y’all said about Patagonia “losing the trademark” if they don’t sue Ms. Pattie is absolute bullshit.
Trademarks are only lost if they are abandoned by the user or if the product made by the company becomes so ubiquitous, everyday, and common that people start calling all types of that product by the trademark name. This is called genericide, because the trademark has become so generic, it is no longer an indicator of one singular source. Think Band-Aid or Thermos; we use those terms to refer to the generic products they’re associated with. We call pretty much all sticky bandages Band-Aids and all containers used to keep things warm in Thermoses.
What Patagonia is doing is actually closer to suing for trademark infringement based on tarnishment, which means the infringer is using the trademark name in a way that makes the company look bad or associates the company with things like drugs or pornography. Queen Pattie Gonia is someone who raises awareness for climate and environmental activism. Nothing about Miss Gonia’s use of the name tarnishes Patagonia’s brand.
The only possible argument the company has is that Miss Gonia’s queer identity could be seen as not “adult-friendly” but that very quickly slides into homophobic and moralistic territory that will absolutely be shot down by the court based on First Amendment rights. People are allowed to use “not safe for work names,” based on caselaw that states that “labels that are disparaging or morally offensive” are a violation of free speech because it’s people’s choice to say and use those names. For example, an all-Asian band applied for the trademark name “The Chinks” because they were taking the racially disparaging name and reclaiming it. The Trademark Office attempted to refuse to grant the band’s trademark, and when the band sued, the Supreme Court sided with the band.
That got off on a little bit of a tangent, but the long and short of it is this: Patagonia has absolutely no basis for a trademark name. Any IP lawyer would say the same. The reason Patagonia is getting away with a frivolous suit like this is because they know their target is a member of a vulnerable minority. Miss Gonia is 100% correct that they are trying to bully her because they know she doesn’t have the money to withstand a years-long expensive lawsuit.
It’s because of idiotic bootlickers who kiss companies’ asses like this that big corporations can get away with hurting independent creators. Patagonia does not have any chance at winning, but they know that just by filing and announcing their lawsuit against Miss Gonia, they are putting pressure on her to give up. If this lawsuit goes on, even if it doesn’t make it to court and just goes to a judge for a quick summary judgment, Miss Gonia would still have to pay for a lawyer to defend her and lawyers cost more money than the average person has. Miss Gonia would win, but because Patagonia set the damages for $1, even if she did win, she’d still end up in debt because in America, the typical rule is that each party pays for the cost of their own attorney’s fees. The only time the opposing side would pay your lawyer’s fees is if you have a contract with them that says so, and that’s usually only used in contracts between businesses or high profile individuals.
What Patagonia is doing is capitalizing on society’s hatred for queer people and anyone resembling a trans woman. Miss Gonia is a drag queen, not trans as far as I’m aware (though please do correct me if I’m wrong) but it’s not like a big company cares to differentiate; they’re just mad that a queer person is using their name in a way they don’t like. Patagonia knows that this particular population has been facing harsh discrimination in society currently. By siding with them, people are actively harming the queer community. Don’t pretend to hide behind trademark law to cover up your prejudices.
Honestly this all seems like a hot fucking mess; this article from the Guardian gives some more details. I don't know enough about IP law to really know what's going on here. I think there is truth to the claim that this case is not as legally open-and-shut in Pattie's favor as some might claim.
That being said, reading Patagonia's actual complaint... they wanted her to not use the words "Pattie Gonia" on any products, regardless of font or logo? Seriously? & it seems the logo shown above was never a product she was selling but rather fan art they wore on social media. He is running a clothing brand, yes, but the clothing he's selling is not trying to look like Patagonia clothes or imitate its logo, & the brand seems fixated on the fact that Pattie wears fan merch of the logo or jokes about Patagonia clothes in a Ted Talk.
Which, sure, I get the claim that people might think they are formally related (their evidence for that is a few Tiktok comments). But, as I (a laywoman) understand it, their claim is based around Pattie selling clothes that infringes on their trademark since they are a clothing brand specifically, yet his merch doesn't imitate Patagonia's to my eyes, and their most compelling evidence is Pattie saying or wearing things that relates to their brand, not the things they are actually selling. Again, the logo shown above was seemingly never being sold by Pattie, it was just something someone made him that they wore in public. If she did sell that logo, why didn't they put that in the complaint? & again the ask of her not using the name Pattie Gonia on merch at all, no matter how it is presented, just seems ridiculous to me? Its a pun based off a fucking geographic range, man.
Regardless, whether Patagonia is legally in the right in the lawsuit, and whether we should give a fuck about the legal rights of a multinational corporation, are two different questions. We will see how this plays out in the legal field, but personally I think even if it comes out in Patagonia's favor, its fucking stupid.
I am also annoyed seeing people in the notes defending Patagonia as this poor innocent company, "owned by its employees," which does so much good work and is being unfairly maligned! & the claim that it is employee-owned surprised me, so I wanted to look it up, and oh boy did I find some interesting information on Patagonia Inc.'s business practices re: human trafficking and taxes!
In 2022 the founder "gave away" the company by giving majority stock to an enviromentalist collective (which, btw, is not the same as the corporation being a worker's collective):
Chouinard’s family donated 2% of all stock and all decision-making authority to a trust, which will oversee the company’s mission and values. The other 98% of the company’s stock will go to a non-profit called the Holdfast Collective, which “will use every dollar received to fight the environmental crisis, protect nature and biodiversity, and support thriving communities, as quickly as possible”, according to the statement.
Each year, the money Patagonia makes after reinvesting in the business will be distributed to the non-profit to help fight the environmental crisis.
The structure, the statement said, was designed to avoid selling the company or taking it public, which could have meant a change in its values.
“Instead of ‘going public’, you could say we’re ‘going purpose’,” said Chouinard. “Instead of extracting value from nature and transforming it into wealth for investors, we’ll use the wealth Patagonia creates to protect the source of all wealth.”
Which is the current big claim to fame with regards to it being a super politically conscious "good" corporation.
So to add a little nuance to this:
Patagonia's clothing has been made by victims of human trafficking and slave labor. This was reported on in 2015 and in 2021 they were named in a lawsuit alongside other companies. & in fact Patagonia uses the same factories as fast fashion companies where workers have workdays over 16 hours, and that article is from 2023, nearly a decade after Patagonia was first saying they just couldn't move their jobs to the US because they had to stick with the factories in Taiwan to make sure they helped end the human trafficking that was going on!
In 2024, the company was dealing with lawsuits in Japan over how it was treating its workers, specifically engaging in some scummery that allowed them to get around contractual obligations to employees.
The "Holdfast Collective" page on Influence Watch:
Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard has faced criticism for skirting taxes through the unique structure of the deal that formed the nonprofit Holdfast Collective. According to media outlet Bloomberg, by creating a social welfare nonprofit instead of selling the company, Chouinard owed $17.5 million in taxes for the shares he transferred to the trusts as opposed to paying potentially $700 million to the Internal Revenue Service in estate and gift taxes that he would have owed if he sold Patagonia, which was valued at $3 billion in 2022.
Chouinard has said he hopes the collective will influence a new form of capitalism [note: he's also claimed to be a socialist, but more Scandinavia than Venezuela, in his words]. In a statement announcing the creation of Holdfast Collective, he also said the collective is one way to put money into campaigning on climate issues while also maintaining Patagonia’s environmentalist values. 1 After the announcement to form Holdfast Collective, Chouinard claimed that “Earth is now [Patagonia’s] only shareholder.”
Also, I am generally critical of anything and anyone which champions enviromentalism and "saving the planet" but only through means that don't fundamentally disrupt anything in any major way. We will not save the planet through capitalism of any kind, we will not "save the planet" without massive societal disruption on some level, & the saviors of the planet will not be individual corporation-owning "philanthropost" -aires' of any kind who throw a bunch of money gained from their shitty labor practices at shiny nonprofits funded by the same governments hungry for oil and lithium, and no one is allowed to criticize them because "ohhh so you think its BAD to give money to CHARITY??? you would rather they did NOTHING???????" cause we let corporations play in our fucking faces all the time.
Regardless of if you think Pattie is legally "innocent" here, you simply do not need to suck Patagonia's dick like this. Something something read The Revolution Will Not Be Funded and stop falling for this blackmail charity greenwashing bullshit.
blakekathryn
theartofmadeline
turnnoffyourmind
izzy806
2087
germansingergirl
