Nix, That Rad Lass

We are, it seems, less likely to tolerate high confidence in women than we are in men. This bias creates a lose-lose situation for women. Since women are seen as less confident than men and since we see confidence as pivotal to leadership, we demand extra displays of confidence in women to consider them worthy of leadership positions. However, when a woman does seem as confident as, or more confident than, men, we are put off by her because high confidence does not fit our gender stereotypes

Teenage girls know a lot more about democracy and what makes it tick than teenage boys, but when it comes to political ambition the boys win hands down.

A global study of 82,000 teenagers from 22 countries showed that almost without exception girls had a greater engagement with and understanding of government, equality, public trust, voting and representation, than their male peers.

But boys were more likely to say they were interested in becoming a politician

“Australian girls are outperforming boys on knowledge, attitudes and values that support a greater competency when it comes to participation in civic life,” said Rachel Parker, from the Australian Council of Educational Research, who worked on the study.

“One of the few areas where boys outperform girls in the study is the intention to be politically active.”

The report, Education for Citizenship in Times of Global Challenge, found that girls were far more knowledgeable about how parliament works, globalisation, independence of statutory authorities and voting and representation.

Girls were also far more likely than boys to support gender equality and equal rights for migrants and cultural groups to access education, employment and political participation.

They were more engaged with big issues such as environmental protection and more likely to participate in civic activities.

However, girls were less likely to report expecting to join a political party or a trade union or stand as a candidate in an election.

The study did not dig into the reasons why, but previous research identified parental influence and societal expectations as feeding gender norms relating to political ambition, as well as widely held perceptions that politics is a man’s world.

Indeed, 40 per cent of boys thought men are better suited to being political leaders than women, while 25 per cent agreed with the statement that women should stay out of politics.

Ella Curran, 18, harboured an ambition to become a politician when she was in Year 9, but a school excursion to Canberra cured her of that notion.

“I started to think more realistically about the sort of lifestyle I wanted for myself. And we did a legal studies excursion to Parliament House and watched question time,” she told AFR Weekend.

“I felt it was so aggressive and personal in the insults that were being thrown about that I just thought it was not the sort of workplace I could feel comfortable in,” said Ms Curran, a first-year arts and philosophy student at the University of Sydney.

“I’m just not prepared to face that kind of abuse or have my appearance or relationship status mocked in public rather than focus on what I am actually doing.”

Ms Curran’s two great passions are climate change and gender equality.

“I’m concerned about climate change, particularly Australia’s response to that because we are one of the worst countries in the world for our emissions,” she said.

Lulu Hamilton, 16, who counts women’s rights and climate change as her two greatest passions, also harboured a fleeting ambition to become a politician when she was younger but abandoned it without any fanfare.

“I thought it was the best platform to make change because if I could have power, I could make my goals become a reality,” Ms Hamilton said.

Having spent the first 12 years of her life in China, seeing democracy in action, including the free exchange of information and ideas, was a head-spinning affair.

“It was such a jarring difference. I never would have spoken to my friends in China about climate change, gender or politics. Even our textbooks had stuff whited out because the Chinese government didn’t want us to read about Tibet and Taiwan. We had very limited access to media.”

As for a future in politics? That’s out of the question.

Then, if you can join me for Phase 2. March 7 2025 thtough March 14 2025? No Amazon. None. 1 week. No orders. Not a single item. Not one ebook. Nothing. 1 week. Just 1.

If you live outside the USA boycott US products on February 28 2025 and stand in solidarity with us and also join us for the week of no Amazon.

Are you with me?

She was 49 years-old and was a 30-year fire fighter who became Captain. Horrible.

This is where reckless and non-stop DEI fearmongering leads.

Took this from Instagram because this is urgent US folks.

You need to call and email your reps no matter if you live in a red or blue state. This cannot be allowed to pass.

& how its republicans top priority to get passed

Spread this far- this could end voting rights for hundreds of millions of Americans

I know other leftists are not the enemy but if we don't have able bodied allies and general population support, there's no hope of pushing back against these ableist policies. These big accounts ignoring a massive minority at risk is scary. The current admin is the problem but there's no hope of a solution without allyship.

"(*The 504 plan) *That law has turned out to be hugely important in education, offering an even broader definition of students with special needs than the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration in September 2024, saying that it was “abusing executive action” to sidestep the law. Under the Biden administration the Section 504 definition of disability was expanded to recognize that “gender dysphoria . . . may be considered a physical or mental impairment.”

The state was suing, Paxton said, "because HHS has no authority to unilaterally rewrite statutory definitions and classify 'gender dysphoria' as a disability."

The suit spends over 30 pages objecting to the addition of gender dysphoria to the Section 504 definition. It argues against the rule’s understanding of gender dysphoria. It argues against the characterization of Olmstead, a 1999 case that found persons with mental disabilities have the right to live outside of institutions. It argues that the new definition conflicts with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It asserts many negative impacts for each of the states that have joined the suit, including, in many cases, challenges with Medicaid compliance.

Then, on page 37, as it reached its third of four counts, the lawsuit switches gears, arguing not for an excision of the new language, but the elimination of Section 504 entirely. The suit argues that Section 504 is “coercive, untethered to the federal interest in disability, and unfairly retroactive” and therefore unconstitutional.

When confronted with protestors, the communications director for the Iowa Attorney General’s office told Michaela Ramm of the Des Moines Register, “The Iowans who were fed lies to show up at our office today in freezing temperatures deserve the truth, and the truth is that no one’s 504 plan is being changed or removed.”

But the language of the lawsuit is clear. The fourth item under “Demand for Relief” says “Declare Section 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794, unconstitutional.”

It’s followed by: “Issue permanent injunctive relief against Defendants enjoining them from enforcing Section 504.”

Let me translate that

Without that right

If you have ANYWHERE on record that you have had one tiny little depressive episode ... or have anxiety ... or anyhing ... a learning disability ...

You can be locked up, against your will