The precedent has been set. We are playing their game and these are their rules.

I am responding specifically to the original point that the 50s represented a time where women somehow worked less than ever before. That’s just not true. I am not arguing against the idea that women performed valuable labor roles.

No, I am arguing with the fact that you said the that the 50s were a “blip” of non-work in women’s working history, when in fact, all the same types of work that had been available to women for hundreds of years continued to be available to them in the 50s. The whole point of the Domestic Housewife image was an artificial cultural push to get women BACK into the types of work you are describing, the pre-WWII style of work to which most women did not necessarily want to return.

Yes, there was a reactionary advertising push toward the Domestic Housewife image that happened in the 50s, but that was a direct response to the fact that in the 50s women were demanding to maintain the transition from home work to society work.

Kids her age often tend to only care about the opinions of other kids their own age.

Sure, but women still did all of those activities in the 50s. That didn’t change. And none of it is the same as holding a paid job. There were a small array of activities available to us, and we were expected to give most of them up upon marriage or at the latest pregnancy. And you couldn’t have a bank account or keep your earnings in any meaningful way. So the 50s were no different from the 30s or 10s in that regard, EXCEPT that women were entering the paid workforce in greater numbers than ever before, which is the opposite of your original point to which I am responding.

I mean that’s just not true. I thought everyone learned about how WWII offered women the opportunity to join the workforce in mass numbers for the first time because of the crucial roles that were left open by the men who were off to fight. That’s what sparked the transition toward women’s right to work at all. Before that, there was no such right. Unless you are counting cooking and cleaning at home, or tending the family farm, as “work”, but I don’t believe that’s what people mean when we are referring to “a woman’s right to work”.

Where can a civilian get a good bulletproof vest?

Rest assured that I have other valuable and relevant skills.

Fair enough.

Not sure I’d pass the background check for that in CA. Years ago I had an unfortunate reaction to a new medication, suffered hallucinations from it, and was involuntarily committed for a few days (I was fully out of it) while I recovered. It’s all documented.

Huh? That other person seems calm and respectful too. What do you mean?

What will that do and how will it help all of the people in her same position?

Where are they being detained and tortured again?

Saw an article today about a French scientist who was denied entry to the US after their phone was searched and texts critical of Trump were found.

You’re getting downvoted but it’s important that we remember this. She’s hot, she’s white, she’s an actress. She said herself she thinks it’s thanks to her friends and family working with the media that she got released at all. I bet she’d agree with you that being white played into her favor here.

Think about all the people who don’t have those types of resources or public empathy points. We have no idea who is actually locked up right now or what will happen to them.

You have a lot of catching up to do. Good luck.

No. The biggest mainstream players in social media are all already aligned with the current administration. Meta et al. would be the ones to be available for free, and alternatives will be paywalled.

Found it, thank you!

It’s part of the strategy – publicly condemn people as being the type of person that is easy to hate so that there is support for the punishment.

If he started disappearing people without giving any reason, his supporters would be more likely to take note of that and question him. “Violent criminals and terrorists” on the other hand, that the people can get behind, apparently without question.

Glad you can see it that way. Even your average liberal agrees that deporting violent criminals is a good idea – what we oppose is the idea that the government can accuse anyone of being a violent criminal without evidence, punish them without scrutiny, and even make them disappear.