Categories Society

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
I've been trying to think that through - not just legally, but judicially.

The more thinking I do the less serious - and more ludicrous - the entire thing looks. And the more obvious it becomes that this is the proposal of deeply unwell individuals who are not thinking clearly.


On the legal side, I read through the list of emergency powers - the whole list - that was assembled by the Brennan Center. Nothing on that list fits. Nothing comes even

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that any executive order along the lines of what has been discussed would be legal. In this case, it can be taken as a given that one or more targeted jurisdictions would dash right off to the courthouse.

Standing would not, it should go without saying, be likely to be an issue. I doubt redressability would either. I think it's very likely that restraining orders and injunctions would be swiftly issued.

That's the legal side, to the extent it's possible to speculate on that at all at this point. Basically, there's no readily apparent legal basis for such a thing, so it probably wouldn't be legal.

That's the easy part. Now for the nuttier side - the logistics.
Compared to white people:
*Black-owned homes devalued 23%
*Black-owned property taxes 13% higher
*Bank fees 2x higher for black customers
*Black-owned biz closed at twice the rate in pandemic
*Black people w/ NO criminal record earn $10k less than white people w/ criminal record

Sources on all that
1. Homes devalued
https://t.co/PChbtDLtDF
2. Property taxes https://t.co/N6ELUlaZsR
3. Bank fees https://t.co/SzLqWQ7IG3
4. Small business closures https://t.co/8OWj0G2f9Z
5. Pay/criminal record comparison

*Black college grads have 50% less wealth than white high school dropouts
*Top 10 most-audited counties are 79% people of color
*Black-white homeowner gap is bigger now than 120 years ago
*Electoral college gives white people 16% more voting power than Black people

Sources on that:
1. College/high school dropout wealth gap: https://t.co/jSPDQhOFSm

2. Most audited counties: https://t.co/IhEliUPPSD

3. Homeownership gap https://t.co/cJl9G2Roan

4. Electoral college

*All Black Americans combined have half the wealth of richest 400 ppl
*White ppl get inheritance at 3x the rate of Black ppl
*Black college grads have $25k more in student debt than white grads
*Black families have $166k less wealth than white families, more than pre-Civil Rights
Hi @THTorguk @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The equal opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Female (including trans female)
Male (including trans male)
Non-binary
Other.

1/12


'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/12


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that. 'Other' is not a valid option.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

3/12


'trans female', 'trans male' and 'Non-binary' are also not valid options are not used or defined in the Act.

4/12

You then ask "Is your gender the same as the gender you were assigned at birth?"

'Gender' at birth is a meaningless concept and 'gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.

5/12
Hi @ASA_UK @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The Diversity details section of your job application has what appears to be a partial list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. However, it has 'gender' but not sex.

1/10


'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

2/10


You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Female
Male.

3/10

'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

4/10


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

5/10
It was fun! I do it to learn more from graduate students' research projects and to push me to think systematically about theorizing. It is my "research gym", the only gym I'm decent at. I prepared a handout and slides (but I forgot to use them. Here some thoughts on theorizing. https://t.co/0tCBllllZh


“By theorizing I mean the process that comes before a theory is presented in its final form” Swedberg 2016, 7

“Although everyone is for "more theory," most of us have rather little understanding of how to get "more theory”.”
Dina A. Zinnes, 1980, 315


How do we shape, draft and calibrate our theory? It is assumed we learn about theorizing via emulation, comparison and practice. Theorizing is a process and we should not confound it with the outcome(a theory). There are pre-theoretical steps/tips that can facilitate the process.


Caveats: this is my way to help theorising. These suggestions are just a theorizing “banister”, nothing more. You will have to climb the stairs for your theory.


What we're aiming at: a theory is a tentative conjecture about the cause of some phenomenon of interest. Logical statement based on assumptions that explain a causal mechanism from which we can derive observable hypotheses and therefore expectations.
@Suman68082748 @thetwinkwolff @x_karran_x @Sunil9130 Lets stop the criticism guys. The lad is good. Losses happen. Losses to unranked players happen too. As do wins vs top 10ers. Let's accept both. Remember Sumit and the likes of him are the best we have. See the bigger picture please.

@thetwinkwolff @x_karran_x @Sunil9130 When the Europeans or South Americans were getting quality practice and tourneys week in week out at reasonable costs, our kids were playing on dung courts or learning outdated serve and volley on grass. Appreciate the fact that the last 10 years have been a hell lot better than

@thetwinkwolff @x_karran_x @Sunil9130 the 10 before that. Real change can't come in a day or even in 10 years. So let's grit our teeth and bide our time till we have an organic self sustaining system in place.

@siyer30 @SportaSmile @Cric_Writer @RomilShukla @amanthejourno

@thetwinkwolff @x_karran_x @Sunil9130 @siyer30 @SportaSmile @Cric_Writer @RomilShukla @amanthejourno Tennis is my favourite sport in the universe. Has always been. Will always be. I was in love with Steffi and Pete a lot before I fell for Sachin. And while I would love every toddler in my family to play sports professionally, I won't encourage them to pursue my favourite sport.

@thetwinkwolff @x_karran_x @Sunil9130 @siyer30 @SportaSmile @Cric_Writer @RomilShukla @amanthejourno It will be career suicide. In other sports, I can actually plan for my ward to be the next Lin Dan or the next Tiger Woods or the next Schumacher even from a base in India. With tennis, in 2020 I can't do that realistically. Just doesn't adds up. Even for total freaks of nature.
Like most movements, I have learned that the definition of feminism has expanded to include simply treating women like human beings.

(A thread for whoever feels like reading)


I have observed feminists on Twitter advocating for rape victims to be heard, rapists to be held accountable, for people to address the misogyny that is deeply rooted in our culture, and for women to be treated with respect.

To me, very easy things to get behind.

And the amount of pushback they receive for those very basic requests is appalling. I see men trip over themselves to defend rape and rapists and misogyny every chance they get. Some accounts are completely dedicated to harassing women on this site. It’s unhealthy.

Furthermore, I have observed how dedicated these misogynists are by how they treat other men that do not immediately side with them. There is an entire lexicon they have created for men who do not openly treat women with disrespect.

Ex: simp, cuck, white knight, beta

All examples of terms they use to demean a man who respects women.

To paraphrase what a wise man on this app said:

Some men hate women so much, they hate men who don’t hate women
Hi @JesusCollegeCam @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES MONITORING FORM in your job application correctly has sex in a list of protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010

However...

https://t.co/rZk1bAiooU

1/11


However, you then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Female
Male.

2/11

'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

3/11


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

4/11


Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.

5/11
Excellent analysis! One of our biggest problems is that people think "democracy," all by itself, is a sufficient check on power. I frankly don't understand how anyone can still believe that, but of course they probably won't be taught otherwise in school.


The disturbing flip side of thinking democracy is a magic talisman against tyranny is the belief that democracy sanctifies power - the essence of majoritarianism. "They can't be dictators if we can vote them out of office!" is one of the most dangerous ideas in the world.

The restraints placed on power are MORE important than the process of choosing who gets to wield it. You would be more free under a tightly restrained hereditary monarch than in a "democracy" with totalitarian centralized power.

The human race learned, fairly recently, that elected government is the approach most likely to maximize liberty and human rights, but where on Earth did we get the notion that it's perfect and sufficient all by itself? The world is full of tyrannies that hold elections.

"Democracy" would be the worst of all worlds - tyranny by mob rule, with the oppressors claiming their every fancy was fully and completely sanctified because they won a vote, and why should we let a stubborn minority thwart The Will of the People?