The GOP's relentless attempts to restrict LGBTQ+ rights are a shameful testament to their bigotry and prejudice. Their support for discriminatory legislation and their refusal to recognize the rights of all Americans is a disgrace. We need to stand united against these attacks and fight for equality for all. #LGBTQRights #EqualityForAll #GOPBigotry #StopTheHate

We'd love to get some info on what you think the best dog breed would be for us, as we're not entirely sure yet, any input is more than welcome. Also, sorry in advance for the amount of stuff i typed down, i saw that i was supposed to be specific, so i was, again, sorry. And thank you! **What breeds or types of dogs are you interested in and why?** * Honestly, I think we both love any kind of dog, but, i'll try to be more specific. I know that we both like retrievers, like the golden retriever and the labrador retriever, as they seem like the perfect blend of playful and friendly. We also really like spitz type dog breeds, like the shiba inu for example, this one is because, at least in my expirience, they seems like really intelligent, loyal and also kind of affectionate breeds once they get to know you better, plus, the shiba inu is pretty independent as well, which i think is a good thing since we both work full time jobs, allthough she leaves her workplace slightly earlier than me, about 30 minutes before i do. We also both have expirience with mutts, as we both grew up with family mutts when we were younger, and at least in our expirience, we both think that they tend to be very affectionate, and also incredibly hyper dogs. **What role is your dog expected to fill and how do you envision your dog fulfilling that role?** * I think the role i would like them to feel would just as a companion dog, you know, go on walks, run, play, bond, and all that jazz. That's pretty much it really, i'm sorry i can't be more specific but that's really all that we want lmao. **What experience do you have owning dogs? How about training dogs?** Have you been the primary caregiver of a dog before? If yes, what breed(s)? What is your experience with puppy or senior dog care? * As I've mentioned before, yes, I have had expirience taking care of dogs, as has my partner, i for one, have had 3 dogs during my life time, which can be sad depending on how you look at it, but the first dog lived all her happy doggo life, she was an amazing dog, but the second one, unfortunatly, had cancer, which again, unfortunatly was caught way too late, my family has a third dog now, which they still currently do. Allthough, as far as training goes, that's actually where I'm not as expirienced, since my first dog was from when i was but a child, and when i actually grew up to know that i was supposed to train her, she was already trained, i tried to train the second one, which seemed to be working, but again, things happen, and the one that my family currently has, I don't have much of a bond with, since I moved out 3 months after we got him. Anyway as far as being a primary caregiver, nope, I've never been the primary caregiver of a dog before, that's true for us both. In terms of what dog breeds we owned, the first one was a mutt, allthoug im pretty sure she was something of a chihuahua or something like that, since she was very small, but she was the sweetest little pupper so, yeah. The second one was a shiba inu, which i suspect might have had some golden retriever in him, but i'm really not sure, just a hunch, the third one is a husky. As for my partner, she's had a shiba inu as her first dog and a mutt as her second. **Do you have other pets or are you planning on having other pets?** If so, what breed/type, age, and sex are they? * Maybe a cat, we have talked about it, and we thought that it might be easier for them to get along if they were both introduced to each other at an early age, but that's not really something we're sure about right now, but for the sake of the argument, let's say that yeah, a cat. **Do you have children or are you planning on having children? Do you often have children as visitors, such as nieces, nephews, cousins, or friends' children?** * No we do not have children, but we plan to have children in the future, maybe in about 3 years, as we have always dreamed of starting a family. We also do get our fair bit of visitors, but also not thaaaat often, maybe a couple times a week or once a month, depends really. **Do you rent or will you be renting in the future? If so, what breed or weight restrictions are on your lease?** What type of building do you rent (condo, apartment, high-rise apartment, townhome, single-family home, etc)? * We are currently renting an apartment, i'd think we live in a fairly big apartment, not huge but, big i'd say. As far as i know the landlord doesn't really care what breed we have as long as it's not too loud as not to disturb the neighbours, which i get, honestly. **Who lives in your household and who will be responsible for taking care of the dog?** How do the other members of the household feel about having a new dog? * As of now, only me and my partner live in this household, and we're both gonna be responsible for it, and im pretty sure we're both giddy with excitement over getting a new pupper. As for as future kids, i mean, what kid doesn't like a friendly and playful doggo? **How often do you have visitors to your home?** * As i've mentioned, a fair bit, a couple times a week or sometimes once a month if evveryone's busy or something. **Do you have a preference for rescuing a dog vs. going through a knowledgeable and reputable breeder?** * I wouldn't mind a rescue honestly, but my partner isn't so sure about that one, so we both agreed we would want to go through the process of finding a good breeder. Maybe one day we'll rescue one though, but as far of right now, she'd rather have a dog from that's still a puppy, since she wants to have the expirience of seeing the pupper grow up, which i can understand, and am fine with. **Do you want a puppy, a young adult (1-3 years), an adult, or a senior? Why?** * As I've mentioned before, we'd want to get a puppy, as we want to see the puppy grow up, and have that expirience, since, like i said before, we were never the primary caregiver of the puppers we did have while growing up. **What size dog are you looking for?** [Here is a size chart for your convenience.](http://i.imgur.com/vnz3usJ.jpg) * After we saw the chart, we'd want a dog that would be taller or equal to a corgi, or at least that's what the dog looked like to us on the chart. **How much barking is too much barking?** * You know the kind of dog that once they hear something outside, they go into a frenzy and don't shut up for the next excruciating minutes, that would be too much barking, obviously, most dogs are going to bark, that's only natural for them, but i'd rather ot have a dog would not shut up no matter what for hours on end basically, for the convenience of our neighbours. **How much regular brushing are you willing to do?** * That's not really an issue for us really, for some reason we both like brushing the dogs, at least for me, it's just really calming and brings me to a meditative like state which is quite pleasant, so yeah. But i'd say that like once or twice a week, as we do like dog with smooth coats, don't know why, but maybe because of the kind of dogs we had while we grew up. **How much shedding do you think you can handle?** Some breeds of dogs shed more than others. Some breeds don't shed, but require trimming or other coat maintenance instead. * I'd say we can tolerate a moderate amount of shedding, it's only expected, and we're not allergic to dogs in any way. but i'd also like to not go crazy cleaning everything and all the time, cause that would get old really fast, so yeah, moderate to low shedding would be ideal. **Are you open to trimming your dog's hair, cleaning ears, clipping nails, or doing other grooming at home? If not, would you be willing to pay a professional to do it regularly?** * Yes to both questions. **How do you feel about slobber? What about farts?** * Slobber is fine mostly i guess, somewhat gross i guess, too many farts are a no-no for my partner as she and her family have this crazy sensitive nose, and she will gag if it's a frequent thing. **How eager-to-please or independent do you want your dog to be?** * Both are great personality traits to have, but maybe a mix of both i guess. Though i guess if i had to choose it would be eager to please but, again we both work, so maybe a mix of the two would be ideal. **What sorts of training do you want your adult dog to have?** * i guess like positive reinforcement, obedience training or whatever it's called, socializing, leash training when we're walking around the streets, behavioral training if necessary of course, ya know, the usual. **Is there any behavior you can’t accommodate?** * Well i guess this is a pretty straight forward answer, but yeah, aggression. I'm well aware no dog is inherintly aggressive and it depends on the way the owners train him and all, but I'd rather we have a dog that's just not as likely to be aggressive because, eventhough we have had dogs before, we were never really the ones that took care of them, so, i don't know i guess im kinda afraid that i'll mess the puppy up, or i'll do a mistake and bam now he's super aggressive. Maybe it's a irrational for me to think like that but yeah, it is what it is. **How important is being able to let your dog roam off-leash in an unfenced area?** * Fairly important, i'd say that's a quality for a dog to do so, since I did grow up in a village and, so far, all my dogs we're allowed to walk off leash for at least a good while, and they were fine, obviously we're now in a city and that's just not gonna fly but i'd like to let him roam a little when we're hiking or, idk in a dog park or something. **How long can you exercise your dog each day, on average? What kinds of exercise are you planning to give your dog regularly?** * Well me and my partner as basically always available after 4 PM, so, yeah, i'd say we'd be able to easily give him exercise for like 4 hours, as we're both pretty active people. **How long do you have to devote to mental stimulation each day?** * Good question, i'm not interely sure how much mental stimulation they would need but i'd guess around an hour or like two would be good, but anyway that's all a guess, i'd try my best to give the dog all the physical and mental stimulation it would need, as would my partner. **Where will the dog be kept when alone and where will the dog sleep?** * At our apartment, and he would be able to sleep in our room, not necessarily in our bed, but in our room i guess. **How often and for how long will the dog be left alone?** * 4 days a week for 8 hours straight, since my partner does have an 8-4 job, and i have a regular 9-5, but we do have a holiday one day of the week, so yeah, weekends are also available of course. **If needed, could you hire a dog walker, pay for doggy day care, or come home during lunch to take care of your dog?** * Not really no, we would be able to come home during lunch as that's what we do anyway, as for the dog walker and all that, maybe sometimes? Definatly not all the time though. **What is the general location in which you live?** You can decline to answer, but responses will likely assume you’re somewhere in the US without breed-specific legislation (BSL). * We live in Portugal. **What is the average temperature of a typical summer day where you live? A typical winter day?** Please indicate Celsius or Fahrenheit and the climate of places you may likely live in the future. * Depends, but in the summer it seems to be around 20°C (68°F) to 30°C(86°F), but i've seen it get even higher like 50ºC, that was one time really. In the winter the average temperature would be around 8°C (46°F) to 16°C(61°F), but again i've seen it be a little lower. **On a scale of 1 to 10, how prepared are you to care for a dog and prioritize its well-being over your career, entertainment, or other life choices for the next 12 or more years?** * I can't say were 100% prepared, as I'm pretty sure we'd be considered begginner dog owners, but i'd say we are at least 7 out of 10 prepared, as far as knowledge and willing to prioritaze or doggo. **Are you aware of the costs associated with dog ownership on an average annual basis? Have you budgeted for additional emergency veterinary care and/or pet insuranc3?** * Absolutely, that's rookie level critical thinking, of course we're well aware of the costs, and are more than prepared for them, as we've been saving up for a couple years, and we both have relatively good pay, so we won't run out of coal so to say, as in, we have our savings for the doggo if an emergency were to happen that we for some reason couldn't budget with our salaries each month, but we'd say we'd be able to budget the salaries for the doggo. 

Similar to a question I asked in the past but mores specific. My property is in a conservation area. My understanding is that the restrictions applied to permitted development come from these two sources: - general restrictions set up a national/broad level for 2(3) land - specific restrictions via Article 4 direction at the council level.
If I want to do something that complies with the general restrictions, and I confirm that there are no applicable article 4 direction further restricting my rights, is there any other source of restrictions that the council can apply?
Particularly, I am building an outbuilding that complies with everything on the legislation about Class E – buildings etc incidental to the enjoyment of a dwellinghouse: - done at the rear of the house - height under 2.5m Etc etc and I have confirmed with the council that there is no article 4 direction applicable to outbuildings. As I understand I have permitted development for this
But I just got a notice that the council wants to visit for a “potential planning violation” and am worried of what other technicalities they can throw at me..

Below you'll find information and links to help advocate for Reproductive Freedoms and Abortion care in Canada and emerging policy issues with the Reddit platform. This is a recurring post and will be periodically updated as needed. Feel free to post additional information and discussions in the comments.
Advocating for Abortion Care in Canada:

• There is a serious lack of Abortion Care options in Canada, particularly in the rural areas, and for those living on reserves, they have almost no access to Abortion care. People may have to travel more than 100km and across provincial lines to access abortion. Some have to travel by plane from their rural community to one with an abortion clinic or hospital. This puts an unfair financial and logistical burden on those that need to access abortion care. Provincial Health Insurance Plans do not cover travel costs related to receiving medical care.
• Because many provinces have few facilities that provide Abortion care, this places an unreasonable load on the clinics that do exist, forcing clients to look elsewhere for facilities with capacity to help them. In Alberta, there is one clinic for every 209,077 people who can become pregnant (number of assigned-at-birth females between the ages of 15-29). PEI, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory each only have 1 Abortion care provider. Nunavut only has 2 abortion providers, and of those, only one offers medical abortion covered by the provincial health insurance plan. In fact, 9 (out of a total of 13) Canadian provinces and territories have five or fewer facililities offering abortion care in their entire province. And 10 Canadian provinces and territories have one or fewer (0) rural facililities offering abortion care.
• Some provinces, have more restrictive guidelines regarding abortion, limiting access to abortion care to those with a gestational period of less than 12 weeks (meaning, 12 weeks since the first day of your last period, not 12 weeks since you discovered you were pregnant or when you had sex). Many people who menstruate have irregular periods. Some people might only menstruate every 2 or 3 months, and might only discover that they are pregnant near the gestation limit of 12 weeks.
• Insurance coverage also limits access to abortions. Some provinces, like Nunavut, do not offer coverage for medical abortions unless they are prescribed and performed in a hospital. And being a rural province, there also happens to be only 1 hospital in Nunavut - Qikiqtani General Hospital in Iqualuit. New Brunswick will only cover abortion services in a hospital setting, which means that abortion medical care provided in clinics are not covered by their Provincial Health Insurance Plan.
• Sexual and reproductive health services are among the services that physicians, pharmacists and nurse practitioners are most frequently unwilling to provide on moral or religious grounds. People who have been harassed and/or attacked while visiting an Abortion clinic may experience stigma and/or discrimination from their peers, especially in smaller, rural communities where everyone knows one another. People refused care by health care professionals because of personal beliefs may experience stigma and/or discrimination, forcing them to travel outside of their community to receive the care they need. This can all be particularly daunting for young people or those with limited resources.
• Everyone in Canada is supposed to have equal rights to access health care, regardless of race, age, class, immigration status, gender expression, sexuality and ability. Nevertheless, anyone's right to seek abortion care can be be impacted by discrimination and bigotry, both systemic and as a result of individual prejudice on the part of service providers. Racism, xenophobia, classism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and ageism in Canada are all direct and intersecting barriers to accessing abortion. It is much more difficult for a person who doesn\u2019t speak English to access abortion services, despite the presence of a translator. Transpeople also experience discrimination at higher rates in reproductive health care settings. Providers may also lack the knowledge or training to provide trans-affirming abortion care and abortion services are typically housed within *women\u2019s* health care departments.
• Further compounding the issue of inequitable abortion access are unregulated crisis pregnancy centres (CPCs), which are anti-choice pregnancy centres that advertise in hospitals, doctor's offices, churches, schools and community centre. They deceive people coming to them for options and advice by giving misinformation about abortion or by insisting on options that may delay or interfere with the clients ability to access the care they need. CPCs far outnumber abortion care providers in Canada. In Ontario alone, there are 77 active CPCs but only 38 abortion care providers. Overall, in Canada, there are 165 known CPCs compared to 147 abortion care providers (as of August 2022).

Reference: Policy Options, via the Institute for Research on Public Policy and Action Canada for Sexual Health & Rights
What can you do to improve access to abortion care in Canada?

1. Listen, research and learn. This is always the first step to understand any problem.
2. Send a letter to your MP and MPP. Tell them that access to abortion care is important and how difficult it can be to access it in your province. Urge them to prevent anti-choice groups and CPCs from receiving charitable status, and to revoke the charitable status from CPCs that already have it. Encourage them to include reasonable reimbursement for travel costs related to receiving medical care when it is not available in your community. And push them to pass Safe Access Zone Legislation to protect patients, practitioners and their staff from anti-choice harassment and intimidation.
3. Give a donation to a pro-choice charitable organization of your choice. Remember, if you give a total of $201 CDN or more to Canadian charitable organizations, you'll get a credit of 29% of your total annual donations on your income taxes (for those that file Canadian Income Taxes, only).
4. Sign up for the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada Newsletter. https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/
5. Participate in local marches and rallys in support of access to abortion care.
6. Spread the Word. Tell your friends and family. Encourage them to research, listen and learn. Encourage them to contact their MPP and MPs.
7. If you work in a Doctor's office or as a family physician, consider incorporating Mifegymiso into your practice to ensure patients have timely access to this essential service. If you are a Doctor, or studying to be one, consider opening an Abortion Care practice when you are licensed and qualified to do so, especially in rural areas where there are a lack of options.
8. If you work in politics, consider proposing legislation that will ensure safe access zones for abortion care providers and their clients and covering reasonable travel costs for constituents when medical care is not available in their community.
9. If you are a journalist or work in media, consider preparing pieces sharing the difficulty Canadians can have accessing medical care such as abortions.
10. If you work in the area of Not For Profit/Advocacy, consider partnering with a Pro-choice organization and helping them spread information and lobby for improving access to abortion care for Canadians.
11. If you know someone who needs abortion care, consider giving them a ride to a clinic, helping them access the advice and care they need, and provide non-judgemental support.
12. Ensure persons of First Nations, Metis and Inuit heritage know about Jordan's Principle, which ensures that First Nations children (which includes people who can become pregnant under the age of 18) can access the products, services and supports they need, when they need them. https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1568396042341/1568396159824

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emerging Policy Issues with Reddit
On July 1, 2023, Reddit raised the price to make calls to their API from being free to a level that killed every third party app on Reddit, from Apollo to Reddit is Fun to Narwhal to BaconReader. This policy change meant that mobile users would have a lesser experience browsing Reddit, users with visual difficulties could not browse reddit as screenreaders are not compatible with the official Reddit app, and mods lost tools that they depend on to keep communities on-topic and spam-free. Many subreddits protested this change in June 2023, and the Reddit admins enforced draconian measures such as removing and replacing mods who privatized their subreddits in protest of this policy change.
On September 12, 2023, Reddit will eliminate reddit coins, including removing all accumulated coins, a perk that Reddit Premium users pay for every month. Coins are used to reward comments and posts by showing your appreciation for the effort. Some reddit coins offer the ability to use reddit without ads.
In March 2024, Reddit had an IPO (Initial Public Offering), and the founder and current CEO, as well as the COO have sold $500,000 of their shares. How does this effect you? Reddit may face pressure to increase revenues to attract investors. This could lead to more ads or new monetization features. There could also be changes to the platform to attract a wider user base, such as bans and censorship on certain topics or words and control over content to appease more conservative shareholders or users.
What can you do to protest policy changes at Reddit?

1. Listen, research and learn. Check /modcoord for updates
2. Cancel your Reddit Premium membership
3. Participate in subreddit led protests
4. Look for other forums to patronize. We have a forum on Discord called Auntie Network Canada. Message the mods here for an invite link to the Discord group.
5. Complain. Message the mods of reddit.com, who are the admins of the site: message reddit: submit a support request: comment in relevant threads on reddit. Leave a negative review on their official iOS or Android app.

“Storage” Restriction Legislation is up for discussion in the House. http://status.rilegislature.gov/documents/agenda-20391.pdf HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
PROPOSED SUB A FOR H-7373 HAS BEEN ADDED
NOTICE OF MEETING
DATE: Thursday, May 23, 2024
TIME: Rise of the House
PLACE: Room 101 - State House

Are you a software developer or business owner launching a new product? Have you considered the legal aspects of protecting your software and your users? If not, it's time to think about implementing an End-User License Agreement (EULA), and here's why.
Protect Your Intellectual Property
Your software represents countless hours of hard work, creativity, and innovation. An EULA serves as a legal document that defines how users can and cannot use your software. It helps safeguard your intellectual property by outlining the terms and conditions of use, including restrictions on copying, modifying, or distributing the software without authorization.
Define User Rights and Responsibilities
An EULA clarifies the rights and responsibilities of both you, as the software owner, and the end user. It establishes the scope of the license granted to users, such as the number of installations allowed, permitted usage scenarios, and any limitations on liability. By clearly defining these parameters, you mitigate the risk of misunderstandings or disputes down the line.
Ensure Compliance with Legal Requirements
In many jurisdictions, certain legal requirements govern the use and distribution of software. An EULA helps ensure compliance with relevant laws and regulations, such as data protection laws, consumer rights legislation, and copyright statutes. By incorporating specific clauses addressing these legal obligations, you demonstrate your commitment to transparency and accountability.
Enhance Legal Protection
An EULA acts as a contractual agreement between you and your users, offering legal protection in the event of disputes or litigation. It serves as evidence of the terms agreed upon by both parties, helping to resolve conflicts and enforce your rights as a software owner. Without a well-drafted EULA in place, you may be vulnerable to legal challenges or unauthorized use of your software.

An EULA serves as a crucial legal instrument that helps define the relationship between you and your users while safeguarding your intellectual property rights. Whether you're a solo developer or a multinational corporation, investing in an EULA generator is a proactive step toward ensuring compliance, mitigating risk, and preserving the integrity of your software.

Do you have any questions or concerns about implementing an EULA for your software? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Debunking Gender Stereotypes: Exploring the Complexity and Significance of Gender
In a world where gender roles and expectations have long been ingrained in society, it's important to challenge and debunk the stereotypes that limit individuals' true potential. The article titled "Debunking Gender Stereotypes: Exploring the Complexity and Significance of Gender" delves deep into this complex and significant topic, shedding light on the multifaceted nature of gender.
By going beyond the binary notion of gender, this article aims to dismantle preconceived notions and shed light on the lived experiences of individuals whose identities don't neatly fit into traditional categories. Through thought-provoking discussions and poignant examples, we explore the societal impact of gender stereotypes and how they contribute to inequality and discrimination.
From analyzing the role of media and cultural influences in perpetuating gender stereotypes to examining the psychological implications for individuals who challenge these norms, this article provides a comprehensive exploration of the topic. By understanding the complexity and significance of gender, we can work towards creating a more inclusive and equitable society for all.
Join us in this eye-opening journey as we navigate the intricacies of gender and work towards breaking down the barriers that limit self-expression and individual fulfillment.
The History and Origins of Gender Stereotypes
Gender stereotypes have a long history deeply ingrained in various cultures worldwide. These stereotypes are often perpetuated through familial, educational, and societal influences. From an early age, children are exposed to expectations and norms associated with their assigned gender. Boys are told to be strong, assertive, and unemotional, while girls are encouraged to be nurturing, submissive, and focused on their appearance.
These stereotypes have roots in historical gender divisions, where men were traditionally seen as providers and protectors, while women were confined to domestic roles. Over time, these divisions became deeply ingrained in societal structures and have continued to shape people's perceptions of gender. However, it is essential to recognize that gender is not solely determined by biological sex but encompasses a spectrum of identities.
The Impact of Gender Stereotypes on Individuals and Society
Gender stereotypes have far-reaching consequences for individuals and society as a whole. They limit individuals' freedom to express themselves authentically and restrict opportunities based on societal expectations. For example, girls may be discouraged from pursuing careers in STEM fields because of the stereotype that these fields are better suited for boys. Similarly, boys might face ridicule or judgment for expressing emotions or pursuing interests traditionally associated with femininity.
These stereotypes also contribute to gender inequality and discrimination. Women are often underrepresented in positions of power and leadership, while men are expected to conform to rigid ideals of masculinity. This perpetuates a cycle of inequality, where individuals are limited by societal expectations rather than their skills and abilities. Furthermore, gender stereotypes can also harm individuals' mental health, leading to feelings of inadequacy, low self-esteem, and anxiety.
Debunking Common Gender Stereotypes
To challenge and debunk gender stereotypes, it is crucial to question and dismantle common misconceptions. One common stereotype is that women are inherently more nurturing and better suited for caregiving roles. However, studies have shown that caregiving abilities are not determined by gender but by individual qualities and experiences. Men can be just as nurturing and capable caregivers as women, and it is essential to recognize and encourage their involvement in caregiving responsibilities.
Another prevalent stereotype is that men are naturally more logical and rational, while women are emotional and irrational. This stereotype not only perpetuates harmful gender norms but also undermines the diverse range of emotions and rationality that all individuals possess. It is important to recognize that emotions are a fundamental part of being human and should not be restricted or stigmatized based on gender.
The Role of Media in Perpetuating Gender Stereotypes
Media plays a significant role in perpetuating gender stereotypes by reinforcing traditional gender roles and ideals. Advertisements often portray women as objects of desire, emphasizing their physical appearance and reinforcing the notion that their worth lies in their attractiveness. On the other hand, men are often portrayed as strong, aggressive, and dominant, reinforcing the stereotype of toxic masculinity.
These portrayals influence societal perceptions and expectations, leading to the internalization of harmful gender stereotypes. It is essential to critically analyze media representations and demand more diverse and inclusive narratives that challenge traditional gender roles. By supporting and consuming media that portrays gender in a more nuanced and egalitarian manner, we can contribute to the dismantling of harmful gender stereotypes.
Breaking Free from Gender Stereotypes: Empowering Individuals
Breaking free from gender stereotypes requires empowering individuals to embrace their authentic selves and reject societal expectations. This empowerment can be achieved through education, awareness, and inclusive policies. Schools and educational institutions have a vital role to play in challenging gender stereotypes by providing comprehensive sex education that goes beyond biological differences and explores the spectrum of gender identities.
Additionally, creating safe spaces where individuals can explore and express their gender identity without fear of judgment or discrimination is crucial. Organizations and communities can also support individuals by implementing policies that promote inclusivity and diversity, such as gender-neutral bathrooms and dress codes. By acknowledging and respecting the diversity of gender identities, we can create a more inclusive and supportive society for all.
Gender Stereotypes in the Workplace
Gender stereotypes continue to shape the dynamics of the workplace, affecting hiring practices, promotions, and career opportunities. Women often face barriers and biases that limit their professional advancement, such as the perception that they are less committed or capable due to their potential reproductive roles. Men, on the other hand, may face discrimination when pursuing careers in traditionally female-dominated fields, such as nursing or teaching.
Addressing gender stereotypes in the workplace requires a commitment to equality and diversity. Employers must examine their hiring practices and ensure they are free from biases that favor one gender over another. Promoting flexible work arrangements, parental leave policies, and mentorship programs can also help create a more inclusive and equitable work environment. By challenging and dismantling gender stereotypes, we can create workplaces that value individuals based on their skills and qualifications rather than societal expectations.
The Importance of Education and Awareness in Challenging Gender Stereotypes
Education and awareness are crucial in challenging and debunking gender stereotypes. By providing comprehensive and inclusive education about gender diversity, we can foster a more accepting and understanding society. This education should begin in schools, where children can learn about the spectrum of gender identities and the importance of respecting and embracing diversity.
Furthermore, ongoing awareness campaigns and discussions about gender stereotypes can help shift societal perceptions and promote inclusivity. Engaging with individuals and communities to challenge their preconceived notions and biases can lead to greater empathy and understanding. By actively seeking out diverse voices and experiences, we can broaden our understanding of gender and work towards dismantling harmful stereotypes.
Promoting Inclusivity and Gender Equality
Promoting inclusivity and gender equality requires collective action and systemic change. Governments, organizations, and individuals all have a role to play in challenging and dismantling gender stereotypes. Governments can enact policies that protect and promote gender equality, such as implementing equal pay legislation and providing support for parental leave.
Organizations can create inclusive workplaces that value diversity and challenge gender norms. By implementing policies that promote work-life balance, offering mentorship programs, and fostering a culture of inclusivity, organizations can create environments where individuals can thrive regardless of their gender identity.
Individuals can contribute to this movement by challenging their own biases and assumptions, advocating for gender equality, and supporting organizations and initiatives that work towards dismantling gender stereotypes. By collectively working towards a more inclusive and equitable society, we can create a world where individuals are free to express their gender identity without fear of judgment or discrimination.
Conclusion: Embracing Diversity and Redefining Gender Norms
In conclusion, gender stereotypes have a profound impact on individuals and society, perpetuating inequality and limiting individual fulfillment. By understanding the complexity and significance of gender, we can challenge and debunk these harmful stereotypes. It is crucial to create environments that empower individuals to embrace their authentic selves and reject societal expectations.
Through education, awareness, and inclusive policies, we can work towards a society that values diversity and promotes gender equality. By embracing the complexity of gender and redefining societal norms, we can create a more inclusive and equitable world for all individuals, regardless of their gender identity. Let us continue to challenge, debunk, and dismantle gender stereotypes, paving the way for a future where true equality and acceptance prevail.
-Jack Bullock (Me)

Like any other political philosophy, adherents of Toryism often break down into different "types". This post aims to provide a quick reference to the differences in Tory thought. I welcome any and all corrections to any misunderstandings I may have on the topic, or for any factual errors I may have made.
High Tory -- This is the original form of Toryism which originally developed in 16th century England. Its adherents defend and stress the importance of traditional ancient institutions such as Monarchy and the State Church, and view the pre-industrial "high" culture of the landed aristocracy to be the pinnacle of civilization. In his book "The North American High Tory Tradition", Ron Dart uses the terms "Red Tory" and "High Tory" almost interchangeably at times.
Red Tory -- This kind of Toryism traditionally has been associated with the trade union and socialist movements. Eugene Forsey is probably the best example of this kind of Toryism, as he was a staunch monarchist, an avid supporter of the trade union movement, was a founding member of both the CCF and the NDP, wanted to preserve Canada's British institutions, and had an inherit disliking of the United Sates because they were on the wrong side of the American Revolution.
Pink Tory -- This kind of Toryism has many similarities with social liberalism: focusing on the promotion of the welfare state and civil rights, the rejection of laissez-faire economics, and for the promotion of the idea that slow incremental change in society is for the best. Robert Stanfield's political philosophy has been associated with Pink Toryism, especially in the 1968 election where he argued for a guaranteed annual income, for the decriminalization of homosexuality, made bilingualism the official Tory position on language & culture, and supported free trade with the United States. To the confusion of many, what an academic might call Pink Toryism is usually referred to today in the media as Red Toryism, due to the colour Red being associated with the social liberal Liberal Party of Canada.
Blue Tory -- This kind of Toryism is focused on liberalizing as much of the economy as possible, as well as focusing on what the government can do to preserve a traditional social order in society. Brian Mulroney is a great example of a Blue Tory, as under his premiership he negotiated free trade between Canada and the United States, attempted to re-criminalization abortion when the mother's life is not at risk, and sold off various unprofitable Crown Corporations.
Green Tory -- This kind of Toryism is most associated with the Green movement and other various environmentally focused organizations. Elizabeth May is perhaps the quintessential Green Tory, as she has dedicated her life to protecting and preserving the environment: from working on Brian Mulroney's Acid Rain legislation as a civil servant to later becoming the leader of the Green Party who was finally able to enter the House of Commons with a caucus of her own. It should be noted that May has stressed the importance of ancient traditions and institutions concerning Parliament, and has shown an interest in becoming an Anglican priest. And as the old saying goes, "Anglicanism is Toryism at prayer".

Contents as below. What's this about?
Dear Firstname
This notice is to inform you of the collection, processing, licensing, and sale of certain information that may contain personal data about you. Rhetorik Limited is a provider of company, technology and business contact intelligence. Our customers are organisations trying to analyse markets and reach business professionals for sales, marketing, advertising and recruitment purposes.
Personal Information Rhetorik processes information about companies, the enterprise technologies they employ, and the decision makers, influencers and users of business products and services. To this end, we process typical business card information, as well as information you have made publicly-available through online websites or social media and other professional information about you (Personal Information), which may contain some or all of these categories of personal data: First Name, Last Name, Company, Office Address, Business Phone Numbers (switchboard, direct dial, mobile), Email Addresses, Job Title, Job Function, Education, Skills, Employment-related information and Social Media URL.
Purpose of Processing Rhetorik processes this information so that it may be licensed to our customers for their sales, marketing, advertising, analytical, or recruiting purposes, or to other organizations who may license it to their customers for the same purposes ("partners").
License agreements are in place between Rhetorik and its customers to ensure the use of the information is restricted to specified purposes and to prohibit the unauthorised use or transfer of the information. Customers access the information via password protected account-based access to our database or services. Our customers, or those of our partners, may use the information to market their services to your employer or to contact you about professional opportunities. In the course of this activity, your data may be transferred outside the EU and UK.
Legal Basis Rhetorik processes your Personal Information in accordance with regulations on data protection, data privacy and electronic communications as currently adopted. We process your personal information based on the legitimate interest of Rhetorik and our customers to engage in the lawful activities described above.
Sources of Personal Information Rhetorik collects Personal Information from multiple sources, which may include websites, government records and other publicly available sources, third party data providers, through telephone-based research interviews, or modelled or inferred from this data.
Your Rights Under the legislation mentioned above, you have the right to access, correct, or suppress the personal information we process about you. You also have the right to object to processing and to lodge a complaint with the relevant regulatory authority in your country, if any.
Please click here if you do not wish your Personal Information to be included in our database, or email us at privacy@rhetorik.com.
Alternatively, submit a form here where you can also learn more about our processing of Personal Information and the organisations who may license the data.
Or contact us at: Data Protection Officer, Rhetorik Limited, Indigo House, Fishponds Road, Wokingham, RG41 2GY United Kingdom.
If you are an EU resident, and you wish to exercise your rights under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) or have any queries in relation to your rights or general privacy matters, please email us at privacy@rhetorik.com. (You may also contact IT Governance Europe Limited, who we have appointed to act as our EU representative, at eurep@itgovernance.eu Please ensure to include our company name (Rhetorik) in any correspondence you send to our Representative.)
Changes to this Privacy Policy will be posted to the Rhetorik website here, and Rhetorik will also notify data subjects of those changes by email.
Regards
Rhetorik Privacy
Rhetorik Limited, a private limited company organized in England and Wales, Co. No. 02958622, with registered office address of Indigo House, Fishponds Road, Wokingham, England, RG41 2GY
To exclude your Personal Information from our database click here
Batch_1719 Denmark

This post is in response to this post which several people spoke about regarding its flaws. I feel the need to highlight on a community level the reality of the situation on the ground in Sordland and express just how dysfunctional Sordland is as a Democracy. I will start out by saying I find the comparison of it being a better Democracy than the United States laughable, and that I actually think the United States has many nuanced answers to issues facing a multicultural society that has allowed it to function as the worlds oldest Democracy. Of course, it has had issues in the past that have been subject to extensive reform, but there's the difference: there's been reform.
Sordland is controlled by two distinct political grounds, and an additional one on the fringe: The Old Guard, the Oligarchs, and the Reformists to an extent. The game tells you this explicitly by placing them in the faction screen. The Old Guard represent the political interests of the former Sollist regime, and by extension your own party the USP. The Oligarchs represent the business interests of the country, the interests of the former Alphonso regime, and in a nuanced way, the ideals of liberal democracy. The reformists are a much less powerful group, but represent a more modern political ideal of social democracy.
These three groups battle for control of the government, with much of the power still consolidated within the old guard. The shadow of Soll looms large on Sordland, and his influence is still felt even to the starting point of the Rayne Presidency. It is a reality of the political situation on the ground that it is much easier to push for Sollenomics than for free market ideals. You have the support of your party behind you, as well as the NFP. Many of your ministers are either indifferent to it, are more focused on social policy, or are just abjectly in favor of it such as Lillias. The only opposition you will receive is from the Oligarchs, who use soft power to try to oppose you. This, in a Sollenomics run, doesn't lend to much other than if you are bad at managing the economy an independent crash separate from their actions. This control over the political thought of Sordland, and the economic situation, lends itself towards authoritarianism. I use the key word "lends" to expressly emphasize that it doesn't have to infringe on peoples personal freedoms, but that because Sollenomics lends itself towards state control, there will be a temptation to take further control of the power bases of the country.
Now, I know authoritarianism is a bit of a loaded term, so I want to give the proponents of sollenomics their fair shake. There is an excellent video on the Ideology of Mr. House in Fallout New Vegas by Soup Emporium that I think explores the ideas of what a functional authoritarian state looks like really well by comparing New Vegas to Singapore within the real world. I think that comparison is very apt here, so I suggest everyone else take a look at it as well. In essence, the functional authoritarian state exercises control over the functions of the state in such a way that doesn't impede on personal freedoms. As long as personal freedoms are protected, often times people are willing to give up certain political protections in favor of a functioning and planned economy ruled by the benevolent leader. The game expresses this very well if you look at the Soll Administration and its history. Under Soll, there was a great economic boom that served to make Sordland a regional power. This was due to the centralization of the economy under Soll and his ability to control its many functions. However, while Soll exercised control over much of the economy, he also exercised control over a lot of the culture and personal freedoms of its citizens. During the Soll era, the Bludish people were harshly discriminated against, much of the state was culturally centralized over the cult of personality of Soll, and many personal freedoms are not sufficiently protected by the Supreme Court or the executive branch. Because of an improper balance of powers, and the wants of the man on top outclassing the personal wants of the people, the ideal of the authoritarian regime begins to crack, leading to the loss of Soll and the rise of Alphonso.
Much of the reasons Soll was even able to gain so much power was because he wrote the Constitution to allow him to do so. The Sollist constitution places a significant amount of power within the executive and the Supreme Court. The legislature, by proxy, is given very little power to actually exercise political control. Anything they pass can be vetoed by the president, and alongside Judicial review being able to smack down almost anything they pass due to the Supreme Court's complete immunity, they also can't change anything on a Constitutional level to check the other two powers because the Supreme Court reviews all constitutional changes before they are passed. Because the Supreme Court is hand picked by the President without even a say from the legislature, Soll was able to consolidate power within his branch continue to control much of the Sordish state long after he left office.
Many of you may be now thinking, "this sounds a lot like the United States," which I would argue is a very surface level way of looking at power balance within the country. Yes, much of the names are the same and there are similar motifs, but that is because this game heavily bases their politics and constitution around the Turkish constitution before it was reformed which itself borrowed its constitutional ideals from the United States. The reality is that the United States has a functional checks and balance system that prevents authoritarianism, and Sordland does not.
I am not going to get political or compare this to the modern day. Instead, I am going to explain the functionality of the balance of powers within the United States, and argue how they vastly differ from the Sordish Constitution. I am then going to argue how those balance of powers functionally allow for a democracy, even if it is flawed, and how Sordland is actually a authoritarian regime cosplaying as a democracy at the start of the Rayne Presidency.
To begin, Congress holds legislative authority to decide what laws to write. There is no Presidential decree system within the United States as there is in Sordland. Only Congress can write laws, and the President must follow them. An executive order only has the "force of law" in that it is the execution of the laws passed by Congress. If it is not within the scop of the law passed by Congress, it is considered ultra vires and thus unconstitutional. Congress, having the ability to decide what laws to pass, might use this power to consolidate their power within their branch and rule a dictatorial committee. As such, the United States gave the President a veto power in order o exercise a check on Congressional power. This veto power allows the President to reject a law passed by Congress in a similar function to the assent of the King in the United Kingdom. However, unlike in the United Kingdom, and unlike in Sordland, this veto can be overruled by a 2/3rds majority within Congress. This is so that the President himself can't exercise abject control over the laws that pass and functionally legislate from the executive by rejecting everything that Congress proposes to limit his power.
This system, and this is hard to accept for many people, creates gridlock. That is a function, not a glitch. The goal is to ensure that no one person exercises too much power within the United States political system that they can gain control over the total function of the State. It requires there be a consensus between two separate legislatures, and the President, in order for political change to take place. It also prioritizes compromise and forces sides to come to the bargaining table instead of pushing through legislation that may favor a slim majority. In short, it gives the minority in a government power, when most systems let the majority run rampant.
Alongside this, there is the Supreme Court. The third check on the power of the legislature and the executive. If the system of government is going to essentially write gridlock into its system to preserve freedom ,it must as a result have a way of resolving conflicts. This is where the Supreme Court comes in. Just like in Sordland, the Supreme Court of the United States has the power of judicial review. The purpose of Judicial review is to determine what the law is, and then determine if it is being applied correctly. This power serves as a mediation system between the legislature and the executive, and ensures that if either steps out of line, the other has recourse. Of course, the Supreme Court in the United States is appointed by the President, however, they must be confirmed by the Senate in order to become a justice. This allows both parties to have a say on who the referees are, and ensures that unlike in Sordland, power can't be consolidated into a particular loyalist power block that will side with one side no matter what.
Notably, the Supreme Court in Sordland also has the power to reject constitutional amendments from the legislature. This appears to be an attempt to check the power of the legislature, but the reality is that the legislature in Sordland has absolutely no power in the first place. It can only create laws with the approval of the president, and can only change the constitution with the approval of the Supreme Court. Unlike in the United States where the legislature can impeach both these branches if they feel they are not exercising their duties correctly, the Grand National Assembly has no functional way of getting rid of the President, or the members of the Supreme Court. They are in reality as powerful as the legislative body in Rizia, and no one ever notices.
I mentioned it before, but another important check on the power of any one branch is the ability of the legislature to impeach. This is a political question and is entirely the purview of the House and Senate of the United States to determine when impeachment is necessary. It allows for the legislature to get rid of any person they feel is consolidating power, and ensures that each branch can functionally control the impulses of another branch. This does not exist in Sordland. The executive wields absolute power to control much of the affairs of Sordland and are impeachable by the Supreme Court, not the legislature. Because they decide who is on the Supreme Court, it once again allows for consolidation of power just as with Soll. The country of Sordland calls itself a democracy, but it is a functioning dictatorship by the time of President Rayne, and his ability to consolidate power is a obvious problem.
These are not the traits we see in the United States. The United States is not unitarian like Sordland, but also has a second check on federal power: the powers of the States. While there is much to joke about when it comes to "states rights" in the context of the United States Civil War, the reality of the situation is the federalist principles of the United States additionally restrict the ability of the federal government to exercise control over every aspect of the country. Unlike in Sordland where the President may exercise power over pretty much anything within the country, and there appears to be no enumerated powers of the national government, the Federal government has no actual general policing power within the United States. They have the Commerce clause, which allows them widely the ability to regulate the functions of the economy both interstate, and to a wide extent intrastate, but it does not, for example, allow them to demand a state do a specific thing. In fact, they are actually limited by the 10th amendments anti-commandeering doctrine from instructing states to create specific laws. They can to some extent incentivize them to do so, but if it becomes too coercive the Supreme Court has in the past struck it down. Additionally, the Constitution gives power of the federal government both to the people, as well as to the states. The House is the proportional body of the federal government that has a proportional seat by population. Conversely, the Senate acts as a check on the power of populism by giving power to the states which function as regional microcosms of different cultures within the country. While the senate has the power of advise and consent, the power to approve treaties, and a few others, the house importantly has the power of the purse, or the ability to control spending. These vastly different powers must come together to pass a bill that is approved by both the people, and the cultures of the United States. This allows the minority to exercise protections against the majority, and ensure that they are at least heard in conversation, not just ignored.
This does not exist in Sordland. The Unicameral legislature of Sordland allows the popular whims of the government to function without any regard for the minorities within the country. the USP can, as the majority holder of the GNA, pass legislation unchecked by the other smaller parties. Confusingly, the NFP is able to pass several pieces of legislation targeting religious and ethnic minorities, but that is because their interests align with the conservative power block within the USP. As a result, they are effectively an extension of the USP, not a counterbalance to it. Additionally, while regions exist in Sordland, they exercise no power and do not serve as roadblocks to the power of the President. Your minister for education, for example, can completely reform the education system even in a place like Gruni, where Soll's influence controls the education of the region. Your minister for Health can enforce vaccine mandates throughout the country over the objection of the conservative population centers throughout the country whose only way of checking the power of the president is not through their regional legislatures, which I don't think even exist, but through a vote for a new President. Conversely, whatever you believe about these policies, in the United States it would be much harder for the President to enact these policies either through the DOE or the DHHS. While not impossible, the regions are still given a say and allowed to exercise some control over politics as a minority.
All of this to say that Sordlands checks and balances are non existent, and their governmental system lends itself to authoritarianism, not democracy. With all that said, lets address some of the issued raised in the previous post with an understanding of checks and balances and what happens when we don't have them:

"In Sordland people are outraged over the ten percent threshold keeping some smaller parties out, but in the US we have a voting system that makes it functionally impossible for small parties to win a single seat."

The original poster is talking about first past the post voting systems. I actually tend to agree with him on this point and think that the FPTP voting systems favor the two current political parties, but this does not change the fact that these two parties are "big tent" as a result of the consolidation. Just like how the USP in Sordland has several sub-factions, so do the Democrats and the Republicans in the United States. There are libertarians, authoritarians, and moderates in the Republicans just like there are socialists, communists, and moderates in the Democrats. Additionally, because representatives represent their states and their districts respectively, they are individually able to exercise more control over their ability to say no to their party. Unlike in the United Kingdom where voting against the party would be a death sentence, representatives in the US are able to do so with minimal repercussions. It allows for smaller parties within parties to function while still upholding the Democrat and Republican monikers. Additionally, I'm pretty sure Sordland also uses FPTP for its GNA elections, but I could be wrong about that.

"In Sordland people make a big deal over the election bill making it harder for small parties to get public funding, but in the US we don’t even have public funding for our elections."

This critique misses the problem with the public funding system. The public itself shouldn't even be funding political parties through their taxes. This is something the United States actually gets right and prevents additional consolidation of power within specific political parties, and it is counted against the United States for some reason. Funding political parties by the government only serves to encourage those with the most power to gain more. Its expressly stated in the game that is what is taking place by multiple people, even the USP, and somehow this was lost.

"In Sordland it’s taken for granted that every vote is counted equally for presidential and assembly elections. In the US we have the Senate and the Electoral College and we barely even question it."

This section seems to presume that the Senate and the electoral college are unfair by their very nature without understanding the purposes of either body, not examining the problems with the GNA and Executive structure as I outlined above. While I already went over the purpose of the Senate as a check on the power of the people, the electoral college I did not talk about. Its purpose is a check on the power of the states, and on the people, in a way that allows the President to be decided by both. Essentially, because the electoral votes are appropriated to states proportionally to however many senators and representatives each state has, it gives a lion share of the votes to states with large populations. However, it still emphasizes the importance of states due to the inclusion of at least 3 votes from every state, and makes it important to win victories in particular states, not just in population centers. By diluting the power of the people in this way, it allows minorities to once again have some say in the political process and not be crowded out by the slim majority. Whether you think the electoral college is a good system or not, it is highly unfair to just assume it has no function. Its purpose is to combine the power structures of Congress in order to decide the person who will execute their laws. And to say that "every vote counts" in Sordland just because they are decided by majority is not a nuanced way to look at power structures and rather favors tyranny of the majority over a sharing of power between political groups.

In Sordland people are outraged over the Supreme Court having the power to block constitutional changes. In the US our constitution can’t be changed without such an absurdly high quorum of state and federal governments that it’s pretty much a nonstarter.

Again, checks and balances that mean something. The United States assumes changing the constitution to be a very important affair. It is not merely another law but rather the very makeup of our democracy. As a result, there needs to be a significant backing by the people to actually acomplish a constitutional change. The country at large needs to actually want the change in order for it to be done, and to do so requires a large power base of the states to ensure it actually represents a large majority of the people. This prevents a slim majority of the states from exercising control over the constitutional process, or prevents a small majority of the population from voting away important fundamental protections. Conversely, the Supreme Court's ability to reject any constitutional issue takes the legislative power away from even the states or their populations and gives a full veto to the judiciary appointed by the President. It is far more restrictive than a requirement there be a consensus of states and to think the United State's system is more restrictive than the Sordland system is laughable.
In conclusion, Sordland is not a functional democracy, nor are its system set up in such a way that favors actual political discourse. It is a tyranny of the majority which functionally gives almost all of its power to its president without any real checks on his authority. The United States systems of checks and balances are a feature, not a bug, and serve to prevent much of the issues that can arise from a bad actor, such as Dictator Rayne, gaining power through the electoral process. If Dictator Rayne won the presidential election in the United States, he would not have been able to do almost any of the awful stuff he did in Sordland. That is a reality of the situation, and is a reality because of the systems of checks and balances that exist in the United States that Sordland does not have.
It's ok to think that the United States has problems. It does objectively have problems. But to say its a worse democracy than a Kingdom in a Republican trench coat is laughable at best and concerning at worst.

First off, I want to point out that I am pro-choice all the way. I'm just curious what your thoughts are on this.
Planned Parenthood, along with the ACLU and the Children's Law Center, opposed California's proposed ban on child marriages. Their opposition was primarily due to concerns that such a ban could inadvertently infringe on minors' rights to access reproductive health care, including abortions. Planned Parenthood argued that placing strict age limits on marriage could set a precedent that might later be used to restrict minors' access to other health services.

• Child marriage is still legal in most of the U.S. Here's why.
• The trouble with legislating juvenile marriage in California
• California fights child marriage

Hi Everyone,
I'm Mariam, a 23-year-old originally from Tbilisi, Georgia. I've been living in Potsdam for the past year on an au-pair visa, which has now expired. I am trying my best to continue my stay in Germany by switching to a language course visa and moving to Berlin, but I am currently facing significant financial and housing difficulties.
During my time as an au-pair, I received pocket money that barely covered my living expenses, making it impossible to save any substantial amount. Now, with my visa expired, I find myself in a difficult situation. To qualify for a language course visa, I need to secure long-term accommodation in Berlin, which is beyond my current financial means. At the moment, I am staying with friends, but this arrangement is unsustainable and has left my housing situation very unstable.
Furthermore, enrolling in a long-term language course is a requirement for my visa application, and the costs associated with these courses are quite high. Adding to my difficulties is the fact that I am unable to start a job that I have found until my visa issues are resolved, leaving me in a frustrating limbo where I cannot generate income to support myself.
Returning to Georgia is not a great option for me due to the increasingly unstable and restrictive political situation there. The government has recently passed a controversial bill, referred to as the "Russian law," which mirrors in a lot of ways Russia's legislation on foreign agents. This law discourages foreign influence and businesses, further isolating the country and taking away any chance that we had of joining the EU and securing Georgias future. Additionally, the police are using violence against protestors, particularly targeting people from LGBT communities, students, and left-wing citizens. The right-wing ideology of the state poses a significant threat to personal freedoms and safety and I fear I will be targeted if I return.
I am reaching out to this community in the hope that someone may have experienced a similar situation or can offer advice on how to navigate this. Specifically, I am seeking:

• Recommendations for affordable housing options in Berlin or nearby areas.
  
• Advice on finding financial support or scholarships for language courses. (I have found one course that is the cheapest ive seen but financially I’m not sure how viable this is.)
  
• Tips on the visa application process and any potential resources that could assist me during this transition. (Im having issues with the knowledge and helpfulness of the Ausländerbehörde employees)
  

Other than that any help, suggestions, or guidance would be immensely appreciated as I am feeling quite desperate and uncertain about my future here. Thank you in advance for your kindness and support :)
Mariam

Please post all your Politics or Ban-related ideas, initiatives, comments, suggestions, news articles, and recommendations in this thread. Unless new information is published in the media, recurring articles related to the gov'ts ***possible*** legislation are to be posted here. These threads will be weekly, until it's necessary for another per-week.
Previous politics threads can be found here. Previous threads can be found here.
We understand that politics is a touchy subject, and at times things can get heated. A reminder of the subreddit rules, when commenting, where subreddit users are expected to abide.

Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.
It's the last few days before Whitsun recess.
MPs go back to their constituencies on Thursday for a week.
They'll wrap up the Digital Markets Bill before they go.
The Lords have pushed back on aspects of the draft legislation a couple of times, but they're unlikely to insist further.
And on Wednesday MPs will debate building a Holocaust memorial.
The government has promised to do it in the next Parliament. Planning permission was previously granted in 2021 to build a monument in Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.

MONDAY 20 MAY

No votes scheduled

TUESDAY 21 MAY

Children (Parental Imprisonment) Bill Requires the government to establish national policy guidelines on children with a parent in prison. Includes identifying the children when their parent is sentenced and creating accountability for providing support to them. Ten minute rule motion presented by Kerry McCarthy.
Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill – consideration of Lords message Applies to: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland Gives the government new powers to increase competition in digital markets currently dominated by a small number of firms. Changes include requiring companies to remind consumers when a free trial is coming to an end and make it easy to cancel and making it illegal to write or commission a fake review. Draft bill (PDF) / Commons Library briefing

WEDNESDAY 22 MAY

Immigration and Asylum Bill Requires MPs to agree a limit on how many people can be granted asylum annually. Provides that only people identified as refugees by the UN Refugee Agency can be granted asylum, except in certain circumstances. Ten minute rule motion presented by Bob Seely.
Holocaust Memorial Bill – committee stage, report stage, 3rd reading Applies to: England, Wales Authorises spending to build a National Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre. Removes land restrictions to allow it to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens next to Parliament Draft bill (PDF)

THURSDAY 23 MAY

No votes scheduled

FRIDAY 24 MAY

No votes scheduled
Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.

Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.
It's the last few days before Whitsun recess.
MPs go back to their constituencies on Thursday for a week.
They'll wrap up the Digital Markets Bill before they go.
The Lords have pushed back on aspects of the draft legislation a couple of times, but they're unlikely to insist further.
And on Wednesday MPs will debate building a Holocaust memorial.
The government has promised to do it in the next Parliament. Planning permission was previously granted in 2021 to build a monument in Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.

MONDAY 20 MAY

No votes scheduled

TUESDAY 21 MAY

Children (Parental Imprisonment) Bill Requires the government to establish national policy guidelines on children with a parent in prison. Includes identifying the children when their parent is sentenced and creating accountability for providing support to them. Ten minute rule motion presented by Kerry McCarthy.
Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill – consideration of Lords message Applies to: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland Gives the government new powers to increase competition in digital markets currently dominated by a small number of firms. Changes include requiring companies to remind consumers when a free trial is coming to an end and make it easy to cancel and making it illegal to write or commission a fake review. Draft bill (PDF) / Commons Library briefing

WEDNESDAY 22 MAY

Immigration and Asylum Bill Requires MPs to agree a limit on how many people can be granted asylum annually. Provides that only people identified as refugees by the UN Refugee Agency can be granted asylum, except in certain circumstances. Ten minute rule motion presented by Bob Seely.
Holocaust Memorial Bill – committee stage, report stage, 3rd reading Applies to: England, Wales Authorises spending to build a National Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre. Removes land restrictions to allow it to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens next to Parliament Draft bill (PDF)

THURSDAY 23 MAY

No votes scheduled

FRIDAY 24 MAY

No votes scheduled
Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.

Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.
It's the last few days before Whitsun recess.
MPs go back to their constituencies on Thursday for a week.
They'll wrap up the Digital Markets Bill before they go.
The Lords have pushed back on aspects of the draft legislation a couple of times, but they're unlikely to insist further.
And on Wednesday MPs will debate building a Holocaust memorial.
The government has promised to do it in the next Parliament. Planning permission was previously granted in 2021 to build a monument in Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.

MONDAY 20 MAY

No votes scheduled

TUESDAY 21 MAY

Children (Parental Imprisonment) Bill Requires the government to establish national policy guidelines on children with a parent in prison. Includes identifying the children when their parent is sentenced and creating accountability for providing support to them. Ten minute rule motion presented by Kerry McCarthy.
Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill – consideration of Lords message Applies to: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland Gives the government new powers to increase competition in digital markets currently dominated by a small number of firms. Changes include requiring companies to remind consumers when a free trial is coming to an end and make it easy to cancel and making it illegal to write or commission a fake review. Draft bill (PDF) / Commons Library briefing

WEDNESDAY 22 MAY

Immigration and Asylum Bill Requires MPs to agree a limit on how many people can be granted asylum annually. Provides that only people identified as refugees by the UN Refugee Agency can be granted asylum, except in certain circumstances. Ten minute rule motion presented by Bob Seely.
Holocaust Memorial Bill – committee stage, report stage, 3rd reading Applies to: England, Wales Authorises spending to build a National Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre. Removes land restrictions to allow it to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens next to Parliament Draft bill (PDF)

THURSDAY 23 MAY

No votes scheduled

FRIDAY 24 MAY

No votes scheduled
Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.

Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.
It's the last few days before Whitsun recess.
MPs go back to their constituencies on Thursday for a week.
They'll wrap up the Digital Markets Bill before they go.
The Lords have pushed back on aspects of the draft legislation a couple of times, but they're unlikely to insist further.
And on Wednesday MPs will debate building a Holocaust memorial.
The government has promised to do it in the next Parliament. Planning permission was previously granted in 2021 to build a monument in Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.

MONDAY 20 MAY

No votes scheduled

TUESDAY 21 MAY

Children (Parental Imprisonment) Bill Requires the government to establish national policy guidelines on children with a parent in prison. Includes identifying the children when their parent is sentenced and creating accountability for providing support to them. Ten minute rule motion presented by Kerry McCarthy.
Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill – consideration of Lords message Applies to: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland Gives the government new powers to increase competition in digital markets currently dominated by a small number of firms. Changes include requiring companies to remind consumers when a free trial is coming to an end and make it easy to cancel and making it illegal to write or commission a fake review. Draft bill (PDF) / Commons Library briefing

WEDNESDAY 22 MAY

Immigration and Asylum Bill Requires MPs to agree a limit on how many people can be granted asylum annually. Provides that only people identified as refugees by the UN Refugee Agency can be granted asylum, except in certain circumstances. Ten minute rule motion presented by Bob Seely.
Holocaust Memorial Bill – committee stage, report stage, 3rd reading Applies to: England, Wales Authorises spending to build a National Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre. Removes land restrictions to allow it to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens next to Parliament Draft bill (PDF)

THURSDAY 23 MAY

No votes scheduled

FRIDAY 24 MAY

No votes scheduled
Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.

Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.
It's the last few days before Whitsun recess.
MPs go back to their constituencies on Thursday for a week.
They'll wrap up the Digital Markets Bill before they go.
The Lords have pushed back on aspects of the draft legislation a couple of times, but they're unlikely to insist further.
And on Wednesday MPs will debate building a Holocaust memorial.
The government has promised to do it in the next Parliament. Planning permission was previously granted in 2021 to build a monument in Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.

MONDAY 20 MAY

No votes scheduled

TUESDAY 21 MAY

Children (Parental Imprisonment) Bill Requires the government to establish national policy guidelines on children with a parent in prison. Includes identifying the children when their parent is sentenced and creating accountability for providing support to them. Ten minute rule motion presented by Kerry McCarthy.
Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill – consideration of Lords message Applies to: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland Gives the government new powers to increase competition in digital markets currently dominated by a small number of firms. Changes include requiring companies to remind consumers when a free trial is coming to an end and make it easy to cancel and making it illegal to write or commission a fake review. Draft bill (PDF) / Commons Library briefing

WEDNESDAY 22 MAY

Immigration and Asylum Bill Requires MPs to agree a limit on how many people can be granted asylum annually. Provides that only people identified as refugees by the UN Refugee Agency can be granted asylum, except in certain circumstances. Ten minute rule motion presented by Bob Seely.
Holocaust Memorial Bill – committee stage, report stage, 3rd reading Applies to: England, Wales Authorises spending to build a National Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre. Removes land restrictions to allow it to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens next to Parliament Draft bill (PDF)

THURSDAY 23 MAY

No votes scheduled

FRIDAY 24 MAY

No votes scheduled
Click here to join more than 5,000 people and get this in your email inbox for free every Sunday.