Yup, xkcd #198 to be exact. "Perspective" is the name of the comic, and the text underneath is the title text.
Care to share sources for any of these claims?
I assume by "the trans athlete in swimming" you're referring to Lia Thomas. Here's an excerpt from her Wikipedia page:
In March 2022, Thomas became the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship in any sport after winning the women's 500-yard freestyle with a time of 4:33.24; Olympic silver medalist Emma Weyant was second with a time 1.75 seconds behind Thomas.
1.75 seconds is hardly "30 seconds" as you claim. Note that this is the only event she won, no one seems to care that she also placed last in the 100 freestyle event, or that even in the event that she won she was over 9 seconds slower than the women's record for 500 yard-freestyle.
As for the MMA fighter, after a quick search I'll assume you're talking about Fallon Fox? It's true she did injure one of her opponents, Tamikka Brents. I don't know much about MMA, but seeing as it's a sport where people punch and kick each other violently, I'd assume injuries happen.
Let's assume she did have an advantage as a result of going through male puberty as a teen. Where do we draw the line in regulating biological advantage in sports?
Caster Semenya, a runner who was assigned female at birth and has lived her entire life as a woman, has higher levels of testosterone than the average cis woman. Should she be banned from competing?
Michael Phelps, a cis man with many Olympic medals in swimming, has an unusually large wingspan, double-jointed ankles, and produces around half the lactic acid of an average person, all of which gives him a biological advantage. Should we rescind his medals?
Why is "unfair biological advantage" in sports only brought up in the case of trans women (or in the case of Caster Selenga, gender non-conforming women who are mistakenly assumed to be trans?)
I've tried searching for "person-independent neopronouns" and failed to find any results.
Care to explain how this is different than referring to one's self in the third person? Because I'll be honest, I have a hard time wrapping my head around this.
My respect isn't conditional to my understanding, but I feel I could respect better if I understood more.
All ~~companies using this shit software~~ should be barred from being landlord and the province should take over
Everything that is necessary for survival (food, water, and shelter at a minimum) should be a public good and not managed by profit-seeking individuals or corporations.
It's worked fine for me across three different addresses. The link I shared in my previous comment also has info on how to report if it doesn't get respected, as the other commenter suggested.
FYI, you can just slap a note on your mailbox saying "No unaddressed mail" and you'll stop receiving the vast majority of junkmail.
I work as a barista and get much too annoyed by people ordering a "regular coffee".
Like I know that 99.999% of the time they mean a drip/filter coffee (excluding that one lady that one time who was surprised I didn't parse "regular coffee" as a latte), but like can you just say drip coffee? Or even simply "coffee"!
I honestly don't even know why it annoys me this much.
I used to do social media for a small theatre company. I would have adored this rather than constantly fighting with the atrocity that is Meta Business Suite.
Not only is it more readable and aesthetically-pleasing, singular "they" is more inclusive of people outside the gender binary!
0, badass is not something I've ever felt, nor particularly strived for.
I'm more of a goodie-two-shoes people pleaser type.
I live in Canada, so I'm obviously biased in the sense that we're one of the countries most affected by US politics, what with them being our largest trade partner and having a massive land border with them.
That being said, are you unaware of the global rise in right-wing extremism and fascism following the 2016 election? The US is the richest country in the world, with the largest military, and they also have a tremendous amount of soft power (at least in English-speaking countries) through their cultural influence in media exports.
I don't understand what you gain by pretending the US isn't a massive global power with huge influence over international relations.