Ambush Predator
You won't see me coming....
Monday, 23 December 2024
Not Sure This Is The Win You Think It Is, O2...
"Yes, It Worked! I Got The Attention I Was Craving!"
Nick Dumont is ready to speak about their coming-out journey after announcing that they are trans masculine nonbinary earlier this month.
? Me neither, Reader, me neither...
The Oppenheimer actor, who clarified that they now use they/them pronouns, spoke about how 'rewarding' coming out was in a statement to Out. Dumont, who has had small roles in the Paul Thomas Anderson films Inherent Vice and Licorice Pizza, also shared that they would continue using their birth name, Emma Dumont, for work projects, but they plan to go by Nick Dumont in their personal life.
How handy...
'Coming out to myself as trans has been one of the longest challenges I've faced in life. It has also been the most rewarding by a mile,' they said.
You've clearly had quite the cossetted and easy life, then...
'Now I'm out, have a life I could have only dreamed of as a kid, and I still get to play women at work.' Dumont proudly declared: 'I'm trans. I love being trans. We're here. We've always been here.'
But you've never been feted and tolerated like you are now, so it's really not so brave of you after all...
They added that they were 'grateful' to live in the present and to have access to 'safe spaces and support' and to be able to 'go to the LA LGBT Center and get medical care without fear.'
By 'medical care', I think she means the opposite. And one day when we come to our senses, we'll look back on what doctors did to people like you the way we look back on Dr Mengele's 'work'....
'I didn't think I'd be out to everyone so soon but I made a promise to myself that if someone asked, I would share,' they said. 'Someone did ask and I shared…because I'm proud.'
If it's truly natural and your 'real self', what do you have to be 'proud' of, exactly?
Sunday, 22 December 2024
No Wonder The Train Timetables Are A Mess...
Sunday Funnies...
Something a little topical for the season...
Saturday, 21 December 2024
Why Have You Told Us For Years That It Is, Then?
And more to the point, why are you telling us something different now?
The list of problems inherited from the Conservatives by Keir Starmer is long, but near the top is how to respond to record levels of net migration.
Is it because Starmer is now getting it in the neck? Well, that's one of the drawbacks of no longer being in opposition - the buck stops where now, Larry?
Starmer has pledged to reduce the economy’s dependency on foreign workers, yet he will need them if he is to have any hope of hitting the government’s target of building 1.5m new homes in England in the current parliament. The construction industry says an additional 251,000 skilled workers will be required in the next five years and there simply aren’t enough UK-born plumbers, bricklayers and electricians to meet the expected demand. The same applies to the target that 92% of patients in England should be waiting no longer than 18 weeks for elective treatment. There is not the time to train more domestic doctors and nurses, so without the NHS being able to recruit from overseas, waiting lists will not come down as planned.
And are we to believe the government doesn't know this? So, they are lying, Larry. Aren't they?
It is because migration is so complex and contentious that those who highlight the possible downsides of migration need to have their voices heard.
Then why have you shouted them down with cries of 'racist!' for the last few years? And why have you changed your tune now?
...the list of those concerned starts at the top with the prime minister, who said that the latest figures were “off the scale”. Starmer is right about that. If the OBR is correct, by the end of this parliament migration will have boosted the UK’s population by 4 million in just eight years. The idea that this can happen without economic effects, without political ramifications and without the public noticing is for the birds.
It's because Starmer's in trouble, isn't it?
Surely They Should First Ensure That It Is..?
The government must urgently reassure consumers that feed additives given to cattle to reduce methane emissions are harmless, and a vital tool in tackling the climate crisis, the chair of an influential parliamentary committee has warned.But is it? Is anyone who isn't already a die-hard 'anthropogenic global warming' fanatic claiming that it is?
Lady Sheehan, chair of the environment and climate change committee of the House of Lords, called on ministers to step up as a row has blown up over the prospective use of the additive Bovaer in British dairy herds supplying Arla, the dairy company.
“The government has the evidence it can use” of the product’s safety, she said. “I can see why the government wouldn’t want to throw its weight behind recommending one of the feed additive options out there because there are others, but the government can point to the evidence to date that the FSA has licensed it and has reassured [consumers] that it is safe.”
Unfortunately, love, the government insisting something is safe doesn't hold as much weight as it once did...
She said seaweed, willow and maize added to cattle diets were also showing promise in reducing methane, and should be further explored.
So we no longer know whether our tea tastes funny because the milk's off, or it's got a tang of seaweed?
Arla announced last month it would start trials of Bovaer in the UK, but an online backlash ensued with some people claiming they would boycott the dairy. Arla and the manufacturer of Bovaer, DSM-Firmenich, have been forced to make public statements that the additive – which has been developed over 15 years and was certified by the UK’s food safety watchdog over a year ago – is safe.
Consumers don't want to buy your product with this stuff in it. What's hard to understand about that?
Sheehan put the row down to “misinformation and disinformation” spread on social media. She added: “The government needs to continue with the trials that it’s doing to stay on top of this, to make sure what the long term effects are.”
So if it's a 'trial' and they don't know what the long term effects are already, how can you claim it's safe?